>> thank you, prime minister. you are very generous. the reason many in parliament oppose the arming of the rebels, the official civil war, the real risk of escalating the violence and, therefore, the suffering. no matter how clinical the strikes, there is a real risk, i suggest, that the violence is escalating, that he can only result in that. what assurance can cd, therefore, that this was escalated violence in the country and beyond theory and borders? >> we do not agree about every aspect of serial policy. that, no. the point i would make is if we were to take action, it would be purely and simply by degrading and did during chemical weapons worry aboutn we escalation, the greatest escalation we have in front of us is the danger of additional chemical weapons if nothing is done. this motion, this issue is not

about arming the rebels. it is not arming the rebels. it is not about changing our approach on syria. it is about chemical weapons, and something i think everybody in this house has an interest in. >> thank you for giving way. the use of chemical weapons has made serious our business. the prime minister agree that we have a strong message to and to resident assad others on the use of chemical weapons and that not to stand by our efforts to deter them would be to undermine ourselves? >> one of the issues our constituents ask most is where is the british national interest in all of this. i would argue a stable middle east is in the national interest, but i think there is a specific national interest related to the chemical weapons and preventing their escalation. speech ine way to my a little bit. i have been trying to address these questions that people have.

that me take the next question of whether we would be in danger of undermining our position. there is not some choice about acting on the one hand about chemical weapons being used against the syria people and on the other hand trying to push or a long-term political solution. we need to do both. we are absolutely committed to using diplomacy to end this. but let me make this point. as long as a side is able to divide assad is able to -- defy international will, he is happy going on killing and maiming his own people as part of his strategy for winning that brutal civil war, so apart from undermining that process, this would actually strengthen their political process. >> i think the prime minister for giving way. one of the consequences of intervening will be the effect

that it will have on other countries in the region, and my particular concern, as he knows, is yemen, which is the most unstable country in the area. has he looked at the consequences about what would happen with intervention and the effects it would have on the stability of a country like yemen? >> of course, we have taken advice from all of the experts on the potential impacts in the region, and this was actually my next question to be answered. the region has already been a family in danger due to the conflict in serial. you have sectarian problems as refugees crossed the border. ally turkey has suffered shelling from across the border and terrorist attacks, but standing by as a new chemical weapons threat emerges, that is not going to alleviate them. it will deepen them. that is why the arab league has it, so clear in condemning attributing it to president

assad, and calling for action. conflict and aggression needs tove all countries prepared stand up. i give way to my honorable friend. >> i believe my constituents, like those of the rest of the house, what the prime minister to make it clear at we are not going to turn away from the illegal use of weapons. but we are going to give peace a chance. will he assure us, will he assure us that he will continue to engage, however difficult, with russia and the other key countries to fight to make sure that the u.n. route is productive and that the diplomatic process is engaged in as soon as possible? myi absolutely agree with right honorable friend that we must continue our process of diplomatic engagement, and i spoke with president obama before the weekend, and i called

resident putin on monday and had a long discussion about this issue. we are a long way apart, but we need to get the geneva process going. if there was any action, it would be immediately taken over by running a political process once again, and britain would do everything in its power to make that happen. but me answer a final question that has been put in the debate over recent days, and that is the question about whether this would risk radicalizing more young muslims, including people in britain. this was a vital question, one not asked enough in 2000 three. this question was asked at the security council yesterday, and we have gotten advice from our counterterrorism experts. there is little room for complacency. proposed will not be a significant force of new radicalization and extremism, and i would make his point. young people are looking at the

pictures of muslims suffering in serious, seeing the most terrific that's from chemical weapons. many of them may be asking if the world will be stepping up, and i believe the message is we should. i will take one more question from the honorable gentleman. >> would he reflect on the question on the humanitarian situation, not just as it may appear but as it happens now? thousands of refugees going to different countries. how can we be absolutely sure theygiven the agencies, have said this is the worst situation of the 21st century, that we are not going to add these countries, including in north africa, to the problems they are facing? gentlemanht honorable makes an extremely important

point. there is the massive role that aid agencies and british aid they is playing in disastrous humanitarian situation. we are one of the largest donors, and we will go on making that investment because we are saving lives and helping people to ask,y, but we have is the unfettered use of chemical weapons by this regime and make the situation worse? i believe it well. if there were a way to degrade future chemical weapons action, it would be a responsible not to do it. when you study what was published by the government, it makes the point that the intervention on the basis of humanitarian protection has to be about saving lives, so, mr. speaker, let me conclude where i began. the question before us is how to respond to one of the worst uses of chemical weapons in 100 years, and the answer is we must do the right wing and in the right way. of the use the lessons previous conflicts. we must pursue every channel at

the united nations and every diplomatic channel with the steps that we take, and we must recognize the skepticism and concerns that many in the country will have, explaining carefully and considerably all the ways in which the actions we take are so very different. we must assure that any action, if it is to be taken, is proportionate, legal, and specific to deter the use of chemical weapons. we must assure that any action is supported and accompanied by an effort for a political solution and to relieve humanitarian suffering in serious, but at the same time, we must not let the specter of previous mistakes their allies our ability to stand up for what is right. we must not be so afraid of doing anything that we end up doing nothing. let me repeat again. there will be no action without a further vote in the house of commons, but on this issue, britain should not stand aside. we must play our part in a strong international response.

we must be prepared to take decisive action to do so. that is what today's action is for, and i commend it to the house. >> order. questioning the motion on serious and the use of chemical weapons as published in corrected form. i call his amendment, the leader of the opposition, ed miller band. rise to mover, i the amendments dating in the name of myself and my right honorable friend, and i start by joining the prime minister in expressing revulsion at the killing of hundreds of innocent on august 21. there was a moral outrage. this was a moral outrage, and the international community is right to condemn it. as the prime minister said, everyone in this house and most people in the country will have seen pictures of men, women, and children gasping for breath and dying as a result of this

heinous attack. i can assure members of this house that the divide that exists does not exist over the condemnation on the use of chemical weapons and the fact that it breaches international the nor does it lie in willingness to condemn the regime of president assad. this housen facing is what if any military action we should take and what criteria should determine that decision, and that is what i want to focus on in my speech today. and i think it is right to say at the beginning of my remarks that as the prime minister set a couple of times in his speech, words to be effective we are not going to get further involved in that conflict. change our stance on serious, and i have got to say to the prime minister with the greatest respect that that is simply not the case. for me, that does not ruled out military intervention. i want to be clear about that. but i do not think anybody in

this house or anybody in the country should be under any illusions about the effect on our relationship to the conflict of serious if we were to militarily intervene. for me,s does not, ruled out intervention, but i think we need to be clear i -- eyed. we need to be clear eyed about the impact that this would have. let me also say, mr. speaker, that this is one of the most solemn duties that this house possesses. in our mind should be this simple question. is it upholding international and legitimacy? how can we make the lives of the syria people better? and it is right to remember on this occasion the duty we owe to the exceptional men and women of our armed forces and their families who will face the direct consequences of any

decision that we make. speaker, the basis on which we make this decision is of fundamental importance, because the basis of making the decision determines legitimacy and moral authority of any action that we undertake. that is why our amendment asks the house to support the clear and legitimate roadmap on this issue. which enable us to judge any recommended international action, and i want to look at the argument about why the sequential roadmap is the right thing for the house to support today. of all, if we follow this road map, it can assure the international community that if we take action, we will have followed the right, legitimate, and legal orders, not an artificial timetable or a political timetable set elsewhere. is very, very important to

any decision we make. mr. speaker, this is fundamental. i believe that any military action we take should be justified in terms of the potential consequences and the everyand that we strain sin you to make every institution we have in our law work to deal with the outrages in syria. now, let me look at the items in our motion. first, and this is where the prime minister and i now agree. we must let the yuan weapons inspectors do their report and make their report to the security council. ban ki-moon said yesterday, and i quote, let them conclude their work, and then we will analyze scientifically with experts, and then we will have to report to the security council for action. be reporting in the coming days. today could not have been the day when the house is asked to decide on military action. for this house, it is surely a basic point.

evidence should precede decision, not decision precede evidence. reflection the prime minister accepted this yesterday. it is true, because some people will discuss this. a resolution of blame is beyond the u.n. mandate. some could say that makes it essentially irrelevant. i disagree. if the u.n. weapons inspectors concluded that chemical weapons have been used, in the eyes of this country and the world, it confers legitimacy on any country or agency. what is more, it is important that what the weapons inspectors discover could give the world greater confidence in identifying the perpetrators of this horrific attack. the second item, mr. speaker, there must be compelling evidence that the theory and government is responsible for the attack. i talked to today chairman of the defense ministry today.

the prime minister said in conflict, there is always reason for doubt, but the greater the weight of the evidence, the better. there will be a release of american intelligence. we will await publication of that evidence, which i gather will be later today, at that evidence will be important in building up the body of evidence that president assad was responsible. might be said that he able to support military action of a kind the government is contemplating. a has put in his amendment list of requirements, virtually all list as far as i can tell in the government motion. why can he not support the government's motion in order that this house could speak with a united voice? >> i will in my remarks say why i do not think that is the case. the government amendment does

not mention compelling evidence against president assad, and i will develop in my remarks on the midpoint of our amendment, which is very important, the basis on which we judge as to whether an action can be judged, and i will come to that later in my remarks. speaker, ist, mr. in light of the inspector as the general said, the un security council should then debate what action should be taken. mr. speaker, i have heard it be said that we should have a united nations moment. that is certainly not my word. there is the seriousness with watch we must take the united nations. we do not went to engineer a moment. instead, we want to adhere to the principles of international law. i give way to the honorable gentleman. is a stark change from at least one of his

predecessors. the house whether he believes that the evidence that has been presented to us today by the joint intelligence committee is compelling or not? is important evidence, but i think we need to gather further evidence over the coming days. the international community and people in this country want to know about president assad's culpability, and i think that is important. i think the prime minister raised this, too. i am very clear that we have to learn the lessons of iraq. of course, we have to learn those lessons. respect for the united nations, and that is part of our amendment today. let me just say on the question of the security council, mr. speaker. i am also clear that it is incumbent on us to give the widest level of support, whatever the intentions of a particular country. the level of international

support is vital, should we decide to take military action. of theital in the eyes world. that is why it cannot be seen as some sideshow or some moments that an essential part of building the case is enter asian -- if intervention takes place. >> he is right the un security council is said -- should not be a sideshow. voting in favor of some intervention? i will come directly to that question. i will come directly to the question. because there will be those that argue that in the event of russia and china vetoing a security council resolution that any military action would necessarily not be legitimate. i understand that view, but i do not agree with it, because i believe if there is a proper case made, for action to be taken, even without a chapter seven security council resolution.

the precedents cited in the prime minister's speech and in the attorney general's advice. speaker, it must detail the attorney general's advice. the attorney general's legal advice, there are three very important conditions. convincing evidence generally accepted about extreme humanitarian distress, second, objectively clear, there is no practical alternative to the use of force if lives are to be saved, that is a testing decision which we need to test out in the coming days and coming period, and third, the proposed use of force must be proportionate and strictly limited. thes very important for house to understand this. in the absence of a chapter seven security council resolution, for action to be taken, but subject to those three conditions, and that is the case that needs to be built

over the coming period. these principles reflect the responsibility to protect him and develop since kosovo, which has widespread support. >> he is right. i did not cover everything in my speech. i could have gone into more detail about the attorney general's advice. the leader of the opposition mentions the three conditions, and the very next sentence from the attorney general is that all three conditions would clearly be met in this case. >> that is the view that needs to be tested out. that is the view that needs to be tested out over the coming period. of course, that is the case, and that is a judgment that will have to be made. speaker, the mr. responsibility to protect also demands a reasonable prospect of excess in in proving the plight of this theory and people.

now, the responsibility to protect is an essential part of making this case. this takes me, mr. speaker, to the final point of the roadmap we propose. any military action -- -- referringming to a paragraph, and he has already touched on anything needs to be beagle and proportionate, and then he goes toabout it being achievable objectives. can he detailed what the objectives are? >> i am coming to that point, and the government needs to set that out in the coming days, and that takes me precisely to the final part of the roadmap, which is any military action must be limited andy time- tied to the use of chemical weapons, so future action requires further report to the house, and it deals with consequences of any action. speaker, there is every

effort to bring the civil war in syria to an and. assad,icular, president but the international community also has the duty to do everything it can for the process, and any action, this is a key point, we take must assist this process and not hinder it, and that is the responsibility that lies on the government in the coming period, the government and its allies, to set out their case. now, there will be some in this house that was say britain notld not,---- should contemplate action. eventsre the horrific unfolding in syria. considering all options available. here is the point, mr. speaker. we owe it to the syria people, to our own country, and to the studyty of our world to any plan as to the consequences they have, and this gives us the

time and space to actually scrutinize what is being proposed by the government to see what the implications are. i give way to the honorable gentleman. >> just for the sake of clarity can the gentleman tell us that if there was no un security council, would labour opposition back intervention? >> it depends on the case that is set out and the extent to which an international support has been developed. look. the honorable gentleman opposite making strange noises. goave to say it is right to about this process in a calm and measured way. are asking me today, yes, let us take military action, i am not going to say that. nor am i going to rule out military action, but we have to do so on the basis of evidence

and the basis on the consensus of report that can be built. i give way. >> the honorable member, a very important question. in a paragraph of his motion, achievable objectives. i assume that means that he has in mind for size and achievable objectives. danny detail what they may be, please? -- can he detailed them? >> to deter the future use of chemical weapons in syria. but as it also says, as it also says, as it also says in point five, the potential consequences in the region. any proposed action to use the deterrence of chemical weapons must be judged. i think there is further work on

the government to set out what that may be. i give way to the honorable gentleman. listening very carefully to what the leader of the opposition is saying, he is making a very strong case against military action. the consequences are very unquantifiable. would be pretty soft in terms of degrading and deterring, and the actual effects on the ground, and also links it to the top the quizzes for the geneva two process, which can only be negative. >> i am saying to the gentleman and the house that we have to assess over the coming period in a calm and measured way, not in a knee-jerk way, and not on a political timetable, whether potential action can be done on the basis of legitimate international law and what the consequences would be. the honorable gentleman for giving way. listening to the speech, using

their word human being, it would seem that the gentleman is trying to divide the house. what happened to the national interest? thathave to say intervention is not worthy of the honorable gentleman. trying to set out a framework for decisions for this house. my interest in this all along has been to assure that the house of commons could make this decision when the evidence is available. there will be some people in the house -- i will give way in a moment. there will be some people in this house, mr. speaker, who believe this decision is simple. there will be some people who think we can make the decision now that we should engage in military conflict. equally, there are those who think we should rule out military conflict now. this is about reflecting on the evidence. i think that is due, and the

roadmap sets it out. not rule out military action, but is not the problem with the government that it is in civil war? hearing what the inspectors say. i do say to my honorable friend and to the house that it was noticeable this morning that it was certainly being presented, the government motion, as if it was voted for, and i think it is an important point, of the house endorsing the principle of military action. motion,why i think our which sets out a framework for decision, is the right thing. i will make a bit more progress. i will give way, yes. >> will the right honorable gentleman confirm that in previous conflicts, such as the intervention in afghanistan,

political parties in this house were briefed in detail and on terms on the nature of evidence of why there should be intervention? can he confirm that there have been no such briefings in advance of this vote? >> well, actually, mr. speaker, but i amd the benefit, sure the prime minister will want to extend that facility to him and to other minority parties, so, mr. speaker, by setting this framework today, we give ourselves the time and space to assess the impact it would have on the serious people, anti-intervention, -- any intervention, and i do not believe this should be a rush to judgment. in the coming days, the government has a responsibility what wason more than

done today to set up the case for why the benefits of intervention and action outweigh the benefits of not acting. now, i do not rule out supporting the prime minister. i do not rule out supporting the prime minister, but i think he has to make a better case than he did today, and, frankly, he cannot say to the house and the country this does not change our stance on serial or our involvement in the syria conflict. in fact, it worsens it, and the house will need to assess it. i am not giving way. our roadmap from evidence to confidence ofhe the house and the british public, and crucially, this is important, it places ,esponsibility on the judgment compelling evidence, the vote in the security council, the legal base, and the process of action and a subsequent vote. i hope the house can unite around our amendment today. sharek we have captured a

view of all sides of the house. there is our anger on the attack against innocent civilians, but also a framework for how we respond. >> can i think my honorable friend and the foreign secretary for the measures they are taking on this very important issue? this could lead to war in the area. war is not some sort of concept. >> that is why there must not be a rush to judgment. my honorable friend is entirely right. i give way. >> i think the honorable gentleman for giving way. does he not appreciate that the first stage of our response to these atrocities is what we do in the chamber this afternoon? given the perfectly legitimate concern about consequences, etc., have been met?

i urge them to support the motion and send a strong message to assad and others? otherwise, we will be national security. >> mr. speaker, we are not going to be supporting a government motion which was briefed this morning, setting out a decision to take military action. that would be the wrong thing to do, and we will oppose the motion. we could only support military action and can only make the decision to do so when the conditions of our amendment are met and if they are met. mr. speaker, we all know that civility cannot be achieved by military means alone. i will end by saying this. the recent turmoil further demonstrates the need to assure the fate ofld innocent civilians and the security and future prosperity of the whole region and the world.

i know the whole house recognizes that this will not and cannot be achieved through a military solution. whatever our disagreements today, we on our side of the house stand ready to play our and to increase the peace prosperity in serious and the middle east, and it is what the people of britain and the world expect. this is a very grave decision, and it should be treated as such by this house, and it will be this country.h in we think about the men, women, and children who have been subjected to this atrocity, and we think about this prospect. can the international community act in a lawful and legitimate way that will help them and prevent further suffering? the deliberations should match the significance of the decision we face. this is why i urge the house to support our decision today. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] back forere called

their summer debate which went a day long and ended up with a vote on the government action on military intervention, that vote to 285, and again, running all day in the house of commons. here on c-span for the next 10 or 15 minutes, we will get your response and thoughts to what you saw in the house of commons and what you think about possible u.s. intervention in serious. here is how you can join the conversation. if you are a republican, here is the number. 202-585-3886. for democrats, 202-585-3885. .or independent, 202-585-3887 we also are on twitter with

#cspanchat, and on facebook, facebook.com/c-span, and this is from liberals for impeachment. our support,ave and we will not have another war. here is another about a proxy war. and there is one from facebook. we will get to some of your tweets. let's go to bed he in hollywood, florida. in hollywood, florida. think we have any business in syria. it is for saudi arabia to stand up. involved keep getting

in these problems in the middle east? time and time again, it shows they do not appreciate what we have done for them. we lose blood. i have lost friends. >> what does it mean to have the british today defeat that vote? >> it says a lot. they are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. starting to do much for that part of the world, and they still do not appreciate what we are trying to do. we just need to wake up and say enough. we have enough poor people here. is spinning out of control. let's take care of america first, and then we can help out our neighbors. but we will show you more of that debate later this evening, 1:20 in the morning, and in the west, 10:20 p.m.

>> i just want to say that in if country here in america, anything took place here, we have already seen our allies, and if this event took country, we would be involved, and i think the whole world would be involved. you see your own children involved in something like this, you want to do something about it. children over in serial or in the uk or over here or somewhere else. >> eggs for your call, and getting your reaction about what happened in the british house of commons and what may happen with the obama decision on what the u.s. response would be.

to 26ke this evening members of congress, according to reports. we will tell you more about that. this is from victor who said this debate is very rich and house of commons, and no one is holding back. a congressman from rhode island tweeted -- in forest hills, new york, on our democrats line. hi, jake. are you there? watching thenjoy house of commons. the opposition party. i feel like we have a social obligation about what is going on in serial, and also at the i like the point that

time and evidence is more important. we need to find out what the evidences are. >> what kind of evidence did you just mentioned? >> they said they used the chemical weapons. all ofl weapons against these people, and people died, but the point i am trying to make is already 100,000 people have died. at is a lot of people. for arguments sake, let's just say that assad used the weapons. that we need to go in, once we go in, the evidence has to be there that he made that decision, so that is the answer. so america is a very strong country.

and i understand it is going to cost us a lot of money. there is the international coalition. he also need to protect our national interests. the economy and so forth. at regardless, we need to step didbecause if assad really or did not, once we step in, we will know exactly what he did. russia and the other major powers, that is what i want to say. >> thank you. that video of president passaro was shot -- resident bashar al- president bashar al- assad. over twoings began years ago, protesters killed by

government security forces back in march 2011. in a washington post piece today, they write about that just a little bit. they say despite government assurances that they would protect the right of peaceful protesters, massacres only increased in severity, and the serious government deployed tanks and rooftop snipers and established checkpoints to control movements. this was back in 2011. a point out the defection of officers, with the free serious army back in july 2011, and the video of the officers issued at that time. here is kevin. he is calling from fort wayne, indiana, on our independent line. >> thank you, first of all, c- span for airing this program tonight. it was a wonderful display of democracy. in terms of the position of where i feel our government

should take, i was in total agreement with the representative from new hampshire added would be nice and would be refreshing if forth itsould carry constitutional duties, because if any military action is taken, any form of military action is taken, we are first and foremost looking at committing an act of war. therefore, congress should be involved in deciding the use of force. as far as a pattern of response, i personally look on the if weion as a matter that go in, we will be repeating the follies of iraq and afghanistan and libya, which is namely to say we are going to further destabilize an unstable region. thes almost like tantamount situation of a forest fire being fed more fire, everyone standing around wondering why the

conflict ration has occurred. >> kevin, thanks for your call. one of the reporters on the ground for the wall street journal. here is a tweet about one hour ago about what is going on in damascus. also, closer to home, a report for the l.a. times, their washington bureau -- the white house did issue kind of a count. 26 members, a meeting that ran 15 minutes. bob corker, ranking republican, issued a statement that said, in part, while i am opposed to american boots on the ground in serial, i would support surgical military strikes given the strong evidence of the continued use of chemical warfare i the

assad regime. whatever action is taken should not further commit the u.s. in strengthen the moderate opposition. that is just some of what senator corker had to say after that meeting. men, virginia, on our public in line. -- manassas, virginia. i'm agree with the previous caller. even though we are not a constitutional republic, the british are showing much more leadership on this issue than we are. i do believe the war powers act should be in vote. i believe congress should actually vote on this, but more importantly, i do not think this is necessarily as far as the white house, the obama administration, it is not so much a strategic issue, it is more of a public relations issue, and i think that things initially three or four days ago were a little bit different

where they wanted to go in and do the strike, and they have bishops in place, the submarines, but i think things have changed. as we see in britain and everything, and i think the concern of the white house is , publica politics relations thing, which tends to be their main concern since they have been in office since 2008. it is more about what their image is and how this will reflect on them and how it will work for the low information voters out there that continue to support him. >> staying in virginia, this -- man wellany well manuel.

the listened to most of discussion that took place in england. i did not like the way the public is learning about the with, and i fully agree the outline that was presented and that isition, the kind of discussion that should be taking place in our country. the congress should be called. if we are going to go into an act of war, and congress is on vacation, and they want to protect themselves, because later they can find fault, this is really not a very good situation, and i feel at this stage, neither the public nor the congress is fully aware of some of the points. they were very clearly elicited by the opposition in england, and similar points are applicable here, because my

britain feeling is that will eventually join the united states, but i think at least going through the process in a way that the public, the people who live in the country should feel they are a part of that discussion. >> they q4 those comments. make sure you mute your set when you call in. in new york times writes that the vote was a stunning defeat for a government that seem days away from joining the united states and france in a short, attacke bruise missile on the syrian government of bashar al-assad. that was from the times. here is what the sun newspaper will look like in london with the knighted issue. here is their front page. say no.iated as mp's

houston, texas. good evening. white, make sure you mute your set. i am going to put you on hold. i will go to jim in port huron, michigan. i think we should go to war and put a stop to that because the civilians should not be involved, and they should not be doing that, and russert -- russia should not be giving them the weapons to do that. if you sit back and let them keep doing that, and you let them get away with it, and you it,ot stop them from doing what is going to stop them from coming over here and doing it? >> dwight? toght, i am going to have let you go. you have to mute your set. richmond, virginia. >> here we go again. this is what we should be thinking about. these people are at it again.

is his country. let them determine themselves what the outcome will be. stay out of it. the congressman do not even want to vote on it. there were 28 out of 500 and some that were on the conference line. they do not even want to deal with it. we will go in and help build the country up and spend some money doing that. it is ridiculous. they are at it again, and we cannot keep doing this. we cannot keep going on. have we forgotten the boys, the kids that came home from the war, and i call them kids because they are so young, and have we forgotten the kids that came home from iraq and afghanistan? tweets --nter for bbc here is miami, florida.

arthur, independent line. >> hi. >> go ahead. >> i was surprised by the outcome of the vote. i cannot believe that any country with a conscience would vote against chemical warfare, and it just amazed me that with good conscience, they would not pass a resolve against using chemical weapons against people. it does not make sense to me. >> let's get one more. thank you for your call, arthur. lila, on the republican line. >> hi, how are you? >> doing fine. i agree with not going over and putting boots on the ground. i believe we should stay here. the you whentrust going in there and looking around. and said over to iran

they had this big bombs, nuclear bombs, and then they go back and say, we did not really find them, but they said we know they have got them, and here we go, we are going off to war in iran and afghanistan. there is no sense in that. we are a big country, but we have got enough people here starving, and i think that our congress and our government need , andt our house in order people, we should take a vote on whether or not we should go to war again. i do not think that should be for the president or congress. a congress will not have chance to debate it for another 10 days or so. they are back from recess on september 9. is likely that there will be some announcement made on the report released looking at the

unclassified report on syria, and that is set to be released sometime tomorrow. we will have coverage if we can on the c-span networks. we will also start off our washington journal program with the ethics and public polity center, a senior adviser on foreign policy during the romney residential campaign, peter w ehner. society perception of the mentally ill, and we will also talk about the cost of college and federal student aid with the national center for education statistics, and the president of college measures. washington journal live tomorrow and every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, and during the congressional break, we have been covering members of congress meeting with their constituents, including a town screll in newl pac

jersey. the townhall is about two hours. [applause] >> thank you, mayor. good evening, everybody. thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. by 8:30,ot to be done so you have to cut me off. when you get your questions, make your questions short, and tell me to keep my mouth shut. only short answers, ok? thank you for coming tonight. and we alsoeetings, have other town meetings, which have been very successful. hands aroundt your my neck. people joining in. 10,000 people last time we had a got tone, and we only about 40 questions.

you get two more questions there. sometimes the questioner get long-winded. john -- joe.nk where is the city manager? city manager? city manager, where are you? he put this together tonight, and i want to give him a round of applause, because putting this together is not an easy thing. thank you, joe. [applause] a moment of silent prayer for the celebration of a great light who is going to be with us for many more years, we pray, and that is our mayor and my good friend. and your dad. we wish him the best of everything. he has been a great mayor, a he has beenman, and down, but you never keep a good man down, so we pray for him. . moment of silence

it is all about celebration. silence]f ladies and gentlemen, thank you. we have got some people to introduce later, quickly. i am going to speak for a little while, and then we will open it up to questions, and that will be the rest of the evening. as i prepared for tonight, as best as you can prepare for a town meeting, and this is our part, when the most this is not ag, sequence of issues i was going , so,ing up, not at all tom, i hope you will give me license to move in whatever direction i can. i want to talk about the hurricane storm.

i want to talk about social security, health care, and then whatever you want to talk about. go through theto first topic tonight, because this is of urgency, and that is the topic of syria. i want to start with that. to spend, you know, all night on that, because we have to get in as many topics as we possibly can. this is serious. anyone who was listening to john mccain tonight, a great american and he talked about it extensively as to where we are at, so there are americans who say we should not do anything. that -- youre your that when he is convinced this. involved inas chemical warfare against his own

people, and the president has vowed to provide us, we folks, information over the next two you, i would suggest to iat he needs to do that, and would suggest to you that we are not going to be going into syria over the next two days, because the american people are not going to be bamboozled again as we were in 1999. we are not going to do that. 2001, rather. that is a serious charge against anybody, that they have used chemical weapons. you have seen the pictures, but that does not tell us who did it. just like when people said in 2011, you had better be out we have to be in front of this.

i said i do not support boots on the ground. that is not the right place to go. first of all, we do not even know who to sell weapons to. you remember iraq and iran? oure were used against brothers and sisters. --we decided over the last shut your phones off, please. first of all, more importantly, i want to induce you to my wife who is here. we stand up. we are only married 50 years. [applause] or were you married to me 50 years. we do not know the weapons and where they are going. we are not sure. now we have an understanding who is there. for instance, from lebanon here, hezbollah is now aiding this theory in government. you know, this is a very tight

network year. iran is helping syria. iraq does not know who the hell they are helping. part in theking 300,000 refugees. jordan and turkey and lebanon are taking many of these refugees. 4 million people have been another three million are in other countries. this is a country that is swarmed. most of the action in c-reactive down here on top of damascus. israel,e i was in looking into lebanon, and then you look into syria, what a beautiful place in the world. if only more people can go there

. unfortunately, there is not peace in the area. damascus isto pretty clear from the hills of the golan. now, the northern part of serious is where the rebels made of progress amount in 2011 and 2012, and, of course, their supplies were assad isso what attempting to do is making sure he keeps this area safe for himself, but there is no question that with hezbollah involved, this has spread. we are not just talking about serious now. -- see. now. we just came out of two

skirmishes. think about this. american people are filled up. is, will westion accept moving in a very physical rebelshelping out the this is about what he has performed. this is about chemical wherefore -- chemical warfare. this is not about regime change. our slatesither from that we have their in the mediterranean, or we act biplanes as we did in 1999 and cozumel. kosovo.oast of

we helped muslims against the christians. the muslims in that area forgot about that. we have to keep on reminding people. they were pushing the folks, macedonia.m went to they were only supposed to be camps.in the the camp i went to, clinton sent us over, there were 35,000 refugees. imagine that. in one refugee camp. they were treated so well that many of the people stayed in macedonia after the war. lost.erican was no boots on the ground. you're not going to see boots on

the ground here. there is no taste in the congress now. there is no taste to bring troops into syria to get rid of assad. there is a taste have a comeuppance, and to say we are not going to tolerate a violation of international law. i want to see for myself the proof before i'm convinced that it was assad they are denying it. everyone would deny. just like saddam hussein denied gassing the kurds in 1989. he could deny. the forensics people there, the u.n. has asked us not to do anything physically. we have the arab league which has condemn the action.

we made this mistake once in the last 20 years. we are not going to make it again. we do not want to act unilaterally. it will not solve any problems. if we get the air bleed -- if we have the arab league to condemn this, turkey is with us, jordan is with us. saudi arabia is with us. leadership here does not know what they are doing. you have problems in iran. they do not know who they elected. they know him. a do not know what direction he is going to be going in. that may be a hopeful sign. that may be a very hopeful sign. i look at it that way. -- how many times have it blown up? hezbollah has

evolved in syria. we have all these different organizations trying to get rid of assad. we have very little intel as to who they are. and, what they are up to. that is the situation that we have now. you can see how closely these countries are. when you do something in one place, let's say we have a strategic bombing mission where andwe go after a stockpile, we know where the stockpile of chemical weapons are in syria. just as we know where nuclear weapons are. think about these things, these

weapons in the hands of the wrong people. we just have to think about that. you do not make snap decisions. even senator mccain said that. you are talking but american lives. you are talking about our sons and daughters. this is the particular situation now. we will make -- the president has made his decision. he wants to talk to the american people and present the evidence. i think that is critical for us. right now, less than 50% of the american people want us to do anything. just let those people decide for themselves what they do. that is what you need to do. we're not going to go into a new area of colonization. the french, the germans, the italians, the english, they had miserable time with

colonization. it tore africa par. -- it tore africa apart. we better know what we are doing. every one of these countries is different. if we treat them all the same, we are making a big mistake. each of these cultures is different. each of the cultures are different. they are different. the of different cultures. the tribalism and one is not in the other. they are in charge. just like the tribalism in afghanistan. we are not used to that. we do not understand that. we think of countries fighting countries. it is not about that, my friends. this is not about that. i wanted to talk to you about this today, and hopefully we'll

have questions later on. i want you to direct your questions. we have five or 10 minutes of questions right now. is right here. it is overrun with refugees. not enough food. trying to deal with the shelter problem. there are some that say why are we even talking about it? we have to get people to work. that is true. why are we talking about it? we have to get health care for people who do not have it. that is true also. what about the conundrum you are under in october when the debt limit runs out and we have to pay our bills? isn't that important? of course it is important. what budget are we going to have?

if we keep on going the way we are going, 300 national parks will be close by january 1. that may not matter to you or me, but it makes a lot of people -- millions of people who go through those parks. the beauty of those national parks. there are important issues. this was significant enough that we start off with -- would anyone like to ask the question now? please make them sure. we have so much to come. you have to go to the mic. there you go. go ahead. >> good evening. i saw what you did on access television in regard to syria. here is how i feel about it.

you did excellent. america a whole, doesn't have to push them out to stay on top of a theocracy. my question is, i believe we should be involved with syria whatsoever. we are not the world police. we're not the world police. we do not have to spare soldiers lives. countries that have attacked our country domestically. they were mastech body count since perl hunter -- the worst mastech body count since pearl harbor. i am running on independent platform. i look forward to the rest of your town hall. >> i will address it. that was a quick commercial.

i just want to say this. considerationng what tom said, i have to weigh and balance my thoughts in terms ,f those pictures that we saw and the evidence which you are about to see. i am saying to you, that is a tough decision you cannot walk away from. distant weapons, a very -- they is a very different situation. when chemical weapons are used, then it is a different ballgame. i understand what we're saying. i understand we don't want to get involved in other people's problems. i am telling you that the middle east is involved in this. there is more to it than meets the eye. thank you for the question. >> good evening.

metmay not remember, but we when you are campaigning in the primaries. >> yes. in the house. >> as i told you in person, i will tell you that you and i are degrees apart on almost all issues. thankfully you won the primary. anyway, with all due respect, and aside from your presentation on syria, i'd like to know from , what is thepinion number one problem that is facing the united states, why you think that is the problem, and what is your proposal to help resolve it.

>> i will respond to that now. the number one problem the united states has is economic sustainability. people don't have jobs. people have jobs that don't pay enough. what are we doing about it? what can we do? with the budget situation that we face. you are going to see a chart about how we are attacking the deficit. how would is very different than a was a few years ago. we have a long ways to go. be careful about what you cut. you may resent it. you may be hurting the people you are trying to help. my biggest -- the number one priority, jobs. that is my number one priority. stop exporting jobs. let's make it in america. that may be a cliché, but i put proposals before the congress to make sure we can give incentives to corporations to bring joerg -- to bring jobs back.

that is the most lamebrain thing i've ever heard. i fight that every day. priority, health care. it has so much to do with the economy. 60% of the jobs of small businesses, many went out of work because of health care. we had to do something. it was not sustainable. you over 40 million people do -- who do not have insurance. we have to address it. is the health care bill the answer? there is no perfect legislation we've ever pass. atill tell you one thing, least there was a plan to put in front of the american people. ,y job is to make sure it works and change it where it doesn't work. next?

i wrote it. who said that? i want to know who said that. i had to read it. i had no choice. [indiscernible] i'm on the health care committee, sir. she is speaking. go ahead. finish. [inaudible question] the federal government doesn't cover me. >> so do we. i have it. sir, sir. let me respond to you before you sit down. most people are going to keep what they have. they have the choice to do that.

[inaudible] get your facts straight and then ask the question. [applause] >> hello. i am from the peace vigil. my son is a marine currently. he has served twice in iraq. i certainly do not want him in another war. number one, i know we have met with you before by the is to you -- about the issue of afghanistan. what are you going to do to get us out of afghanistan before 2014? we want the troops out.

i know there are a lot of people who want to speak. iraq, there were weapons -- they were allegedly weapons of mass destruction. evidence, with fake false evidence. >> what is your question? >> kids died looking for those weapons of mass destruction which didn't exist. if we go in surgically to serial, and blow up weapons, can you imagine blowing up weapons that are lethal, searing gas? that makes no sense to me. the question on syria, will you pledge no going into serious, only diplomacy?

>> i will not vote for boots on the ground in syria. when i say surgically, there is no question that collateral damage here, and collateral injuries is something that needs to be taken into consideration. i leave that to the generals in the field. i think they know what they are doing. .ou asked the question can i respond? thank you. the question is, you saw what happened with the drone attacks. innocent people were killed. that happens. war is not pretty. we want our troops out. nobody wants them out more than i do. i have seen it with my own two eyes. we are not going to be stupid. we are not going to leave our troops that we leave their vulnerable. that is what i'm concerned about. as quick as i want to withdraw, i believe that we should, i want

to know if the afghans who want us out, maybe they don't, but the point is we are not staying. we are leaving. could we get up by the end of this year? i do not think so. midway through 2014 question mark that is an objective we can discuss. we are going to leave some people there. there is no question about it. i'm telling you honest. we do not know what is going to happen there. we do not know if they're going to make peace with the afghan government. we do not have an idea. we are trying to do that right now. we can negotiate. >> make these questions about syria. >> in terms of syria, you mentioned the u.s. doesn't want to be put in a position of colonization. when did we ever colonize any part of the world?

post-world war ii, we went to germany and england, and france, and the netherlands. >> i would consider that colonization. >> exactly. >> we went in. we help to rebuild the countries. and then we got up. want to ask a quick question about health care. billion is being cut from medicare to fund the affordable care act. i was like to know how congress is going to make up for this? >> the money that is being cut, this is not a partisan talent meeting.

-- town meeting. we were being accused of taking money out of medicare. -- wes only deduced reduced all of the advantages of medicare advantage, if you remember. we were paying more for in the general run of things then a patient. that is where the cuts were. they were not to anybody's benefit. [no audio] >> go ahead.

care act willble be extremely expensive, as evidenced by companies laying people off. how are you going to make up for this with a $70 trillion debt? >> we think we can pay for -- do not leave the mike please. i would like to respond. we think we can come up with the money for health care changes. intopeople are going to go a private insurance company, who is going to have a plethora of possibilities to buy programs depending on your individual needs. number two, insurance companies have to spend 80% of their profits on us.

no longer can you drop it to 50%, or 60%, when you're taking the profit and charging higher premiums. that is the law now. money have been returned by their insurance companies. that was also in the affordable care act. is it going to be a perfect transition? is it going to be a perfect transition? i doubt it. i say to you, it is the best plan in town now. we change social security. we change medicare over the years. that is what we will do with the health care. it is the law of the land. thank you. >> thank you. >> hello. i am here to ask you about the cpi, in regard to

seniors. >> i'm voting no on it. >> thank you. [applause] >> that was short and sweet. >> i am from new jersey. not really a question, but a comment about syria and the position. the u.s. is a great country. it is a religious country. >> the greatest country in the world. >> thing god for america. we made a mistake and entering the world word -- world war ii too late. it is not a mistake we can afford to make ever, ever again. broke.ve the country is we can't afford boots on the ground.

>> our country is not broke. ,e have three times the economy regardless of what we have been reading. this country is not on our knees. this country is not ready to collapse. anybody who told you that, tell them they do not know what they are talking about. what is your first and question mark >> allen. i didn't mean it that way. we are the biggest economy in the world. we can't afford another big war. that is the point i was trying to make. we can't afford boots on the ground. if we can use your leadership and the leadership of the president to build up a coalition and former limited action where countries come together, not just unilaterally the u.s. going and doing things over there. that is going to put further strain on our budget and our deficit.

>> i want to respond to what you said. we made a huge mistake in an -- and i rock and afghanistan. we cannot afford to do that anymore. it has debilitated our economy. it is one of many things that have debilitated it. this. say the cost needs to be taken into effect. we do not take into effect -- the war doesn't end when the last shot is fired. , havee so many soldiers come out of iraq and afghanistan with wounded minds. that is just as bad as a broken arm or a bullet. post radix stress disorder -- ptsd, the department of defense providing funds to get these people healed. we're not throwing these people

into corners. we are a dressing it aggressively, bringing the family in to help them. 20% of those on the field after manic brain injury or post dramatic stress disorder. this is a shame we have to address. whenever we get into, the war doesn't end after the last shot. >> got help you make the right decision. this is tricky. we have to be wise. everylways pray before decision. >> thank you. >> i try to pray before every decision. next, young lady? >speak out.

hold and talk into it. >> good evening. >> give us your question, please. my name is sue. [inaudible] i'm sorry if this issue is too .mall compared to syria >> no issues too small. go ahead. i have to hear you to know how to respond. [inaudible]ouble we had trouble. i wrote letters to our mayor. i wonder if i'm doing the right thing. , i'm going toers have one of them respond to you. you are going to meet with them now.

>> i meeting with them. >> who are you talking to? >> assad. >> you are doing the right thing if you're talking to him. >> thank you. i cannot be alone in this condition. i have to tell you this. we talk about these issues, nobody ever brings up the fact of the staff that work for every congressman in the united states. they work their fannies off. they work early in the morning. they work nights. we had 8-9 here tonight. they work. that is sourhat grapes. we haven't had a raise in four years. they didn't have a raise in four years. i am telling you, i am very proud of our staff. with, subject they deal

and how they help people day in and day out. so, you brought it to the right place. >> thank you. >> god bless you. next. >> is this working? of pda, on behalf progressive democrats of america. i have a letter to present to you. i'm going to summarize the legislation they recommend that you support. this is the 50th anniversary the king speech. 1000, beforehr employment bill, which guarantees someone every -- everyone some kind of job. the voter empowerment act. it simplifies the voting process. deadline for revocation of

the e.r.a., and proposes an amendment to constitutions writing -- regarding the right to vote. the inclusive prosperity act, known as the financial regulation tasks, which would generate hundreds of billions of dollars, a quarter of a percent on wall street. that is basically the legislature. familiar with most of them. the first one, i'm not so sure about. i want to read the piece of legislation. the government has responsibility to your health and my health. the government does not have responsibility in terms of jobs. we have to go out and look for jobs. the government has responsibility in terms of providing incentives to business . that is important. or providing education so people can learn a job. or go on the job retraining

programs are critical. tech schools are critical. community colleges are critical to this. i would not go so far as to say we have to guarantee a job for everybody in the country. i would say to the government has responsibility to provide work. don't forget, the number of jobs that have been created over the last four years, more jobs than the past seven years. the point is, where we are losing in that unemployed array, it is stubbornly not coming down because what we have done in the public sector, where we have lost jobs on the federal level, state level, and local level. some people, some jobs need not exist. the point that i'm trying to make is that that is where we have fallen behind. i would -- >> the cta in the 70s, those

were good programs. this is not the pda. when you had the debate in the primary, i met with you, spoke to after the debate. i confronted you and said if you win this primary, do you -- would you make a commitment you will join with the progressive caucus and become a member of the congressional progressive caucus. >> i do not agree with him on everything. i'm contemplating joining. i will tell you what is holding me back. i am not so sure i should belong to any democratic party caucus. i think it divides our party. i would rather see us together and then go out as best we can as unified group. [applause] not everybody is going to march to the same drummer.

i know that. you are looking at one of them. i told you i would contemplate it. i have been. i am talking to my closest friends in the congress. a great american patriot. he belongs to the caucus. he has not convinced me yet. we will talk again. next. >> i want to ask about syria. >> where you from? >> bayonne, new jersey. ray to have you here. -- great to have you here. say we hit syria in the next couple of days.

i ran says they might strike , who knows. has law -- has bullet, what is going to be the response? what is your opinion? >> any attack of iran on israel is an attack on the united states. -- i'm respected by the israeli community in jewish community, and the muslim community. and no i say it how it is. i am no one's lapdog. but, when you attack our strongest ally in the region, it is an attack on the united states of america. that doesn't mean we're going to drop an atomic bomb. it does mean we're going to have to respond in a physical way. >> what about if i ran -- what if it is hezbollah and they use terrorist organization.

and they use it to attack u.s. interest rate >> they are. trying to do what we can without going to war with them. trying to destroy countries and destroy people. they have laid down their mantle. i do not think it is healthy for the united states. we can separate ourselves and isolate ourselves all we want. it is interesting when i read in the peeper the other day that we -- better think twice about we also think twice because we are going to shrink our possibilities concerning oil. with the person who wrote that, in the past four years, this country is not 60% but now 40%

dependent on foreign oil. that is the law. that is the facts. people who do not know what they're talking about talk about oil, oil. the have no idea. we need to do alternative energy. we need to do natural gas. we need to do drilling in united states where it is appropriate. not the shores of new jersey, or maryland, or virginia. i will vote against every time if i have to. >> good evening. you have a lot of weighty issues to talk about tonight. this is not one of them. members.has 18,000 tax exemption is coming up before the joint commission on

taxation. we're looking for your support to maintain credit union tax exemptions throughout. >> not every tax-exempt and is a loophole. let's get that straight. there are some i will fight for. we write the taxol. it is one of our major responsibilities. we write the trade bills. we write medicare. whatever changes in medicare. etc., etc.. we are now on the process of looking at tax reform. whether we can come up with a system or form that is neutral. taxes have to be raised. but if you deal with deductions, that is a tax increase as far as i'm concerned. one of the things we talked about, the a section you are

talking about. that is no different than the exception about charity contributions. that is a different than if you can take off your mortgage interest adoptions, which will kill new jersey for deal way with that deduction, or you can put on your federal income tax and deduct the state taxes that you pay. these are all under attack right now. what we should be attacking is the loopholes that exist in the loss of that people can put their money offshore, see you when i have to pay more taxes. i want to fight that and he was much as i can to stop that immediately. i will do everything in my power . i am fighting to lower the corporate taxes. i want to lower corporate taxes. i came up with that six years ago. those are the things i'm concerned about. i certainly want to a pole --

they do a terrific job. they are the compensation we need. i'm on the legislation that will keep the deduction. >> which is why i'm here. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. my name is michelle. i have one comment on the obamacare. the one-year delay that you mentioned for companies. that was delayed for one year from the start date. the individual mandate still holds for people. in my opinion, that is a problem. when you look at the companies that are dropping coverage for spouses, there is now a subsidy for the congress staff. i think that is unfair.

if it was so great, it would have been sped up. everybody would be delighted by. i cannot imagine that the government can run anything cheaper than the private market when the government has never done that before. >> medicare -- >> medicare is in debt. medicare is a huge debt. >> can i respond? >> yes. i'm just saying. >> thank you. it has been proven over and over again, since 1965. medicare needs to change. that is not one of them. it has a low administrative costs. ms. --given you tonight myths about the health care bill. i want you to take them home. these are the myths.

back to me, and we will discuss it. you got it. [inaudible] you behave yourself, i will buy you a beer. can you hear me back there? and helps i'm a loudmouth. the individual mandate is upheld by the supreme court of the united states for the following reasons. i will be short. if we do not have everybody in, it doesn't work. that is a republican plan from 20 years ago. and 15 years ago. that is not a democratic plan. that was not proposed by the democratic party. that is exactly what the basis

of the massachusetts plan. >> it doesn't matter whose party it is. >> that is why i said. that is a mandate. the supreme court has upheld the mandate. beginning october 1, we will , those were not covered by companies, those who don't have individual insurance, mostly healthy people who feel they do not need insurance, so why you forcing me to do this, the point of the matter is, we do not want an insurance system that has only sick people in it, and the healthy people are out of it. it will not work. that is why our system work. this is not socialism. this is capitalism. do many insurance companies think right insurance in the state of new jersey? very few. controlled by is

the state commissioner. in each day, how commissioners have different rules. is the only area. you can see your doctor. you can see your hospital. you cannot sue your insurance company. we have built a moat around them. >> you did have relief from [indiscernible] >> they are exempt. you cannot have any racketeering charges against insurance companies. >> it doesn't have to be racketeering. gone through the appeals rosses. i know what it entails. i made the point. i'm not here to badger the issue. i do want to mention one other thing. it is sure. the scandals and the job situation, the irs.

>> what about them? what's candles? -- scandals. the fraud that is in our benefit plans. this costs us a lot of money with taxes. the trust is broken. do too you propose to reestablish trust, so people do not feel that every time they turn around, it is another tax they can't afford, and it was the way it was when i was a child growing up. >> no federal taxes have been increased over the last four years. none. number two, when we are talking about taxes, most people when you get down to it, are talking about local taxes. they have gone up tremendously.

for a number of reasons. i'm not here to blame anybody. that is a fact of life. the scandals you talk about, we heard those here in front of my committee. not placenta of truth to those scandals. that is why the person who started the inquiry, congressman issa has dropped out of the scene. i cannot find it anymore. once you accuse somebody of something, and he downgraded the irs, i fight more than anyone else in the room. they are under the office of the ways and means committee. i'm not going to code -- i'm not going to accuse them. there are a lot of hard workers there. we have the irs in our building. we talk to them all the time. we bring complaints to them all the time. when you talk about scandal, about a conspiracy to look at

this group or that group, they are looking at everybody. you do not have the half of what they looked at. scandal is a easy were to throw round. word toal is an easy throw round. [inaudible] i do not claim to know her. we were not successful. next question. wax hello. -- >> hello. i am a retired postal worker. lex let's hear it for the postal workers. >> do we want to keep six-day delivery? >> yes. my question concerns syria. during my lifetime, the great wars the u.s. is entered into, vietnam and iraq, we were led into by lies.

the gulf of tonkin incident never happened, and there were no weapons of mass destruction. why do you not advocate a sane policy of no u.s. aggressive action in syria until the u.n. fact-finding committee issues its report? up,s i said, when i opened the u.n. has made a request to minute states -- to the united states that no physical action be taken until they have finished their report by sunday of this week. from what i understand, and what i can say, that is being taken into consideration. i would hope that we would adhere to that. at few days is not going to matter here. the american people want to see the evidence. the american people deserve it. by the way, i'm a congressman.

i would like to see the evidence. that is as far as i will go. a reasonable a request. they delayed the beginning of the investigation, the bigger the more they delay it, less evidence would be sanctified. that is very critical and important. that evidence be captured, and identifiable, and it not be dissolved in the air so we can find out where it came from. >> it is my understanding they have said yes to the u.n. investigative team. >> only after they held it up. >> and the tax came from the rebel controlled area. >> we do not know that. andguardian reported it, the times reported it. i do not know that. i'm telling you that. yes sir.

i have a question of -- two questions. advocate federal tax. >> i have said we do not have a federal income tax increase in four years. that is what i said. a decrease ind taxes. [inaudible] the payroll taxes we got down. that wasn't my idea. i voted against that. artie, head of my legislation. let's give him a hand. [applause]

>> the bush tax cuts did expire for those making $450,000 a year. mentionedson why i taxes, they use a federal bill --increase the nation's tax munitions tax. >> that is our bill. the bill has to go through so many committees. >> in terms of where you stand. the excise tax on ammunition and weapons has not been increases 1942 and 1951. i felt it was a good source to consider and look at four helping a police department.

thean no longer rely on cops bill. every year.attack i got to uphold that source of revenue to help local communities. they're going bankrupt. i think that is i help. we have have law-enforcement. it is nice to talk nice things about law enforcement. i'm the cochair of the law enforcement and congress of the united states. it is my job not to pat the cops on the back. but to protect them, and to strengthen them against those who want to harm them. [applause] isn't local law enforcement funded by local taxes? >> mostly. so, in december of 2012, the

school shooting in connecticut. you were on the front lines of advocating more gun control. >> that is not true. i was on the front lines of ending gun violence. i'm not introducing legislation to take guns away from anybody except those who do not have the mental capacity to have it. we will never find out unless we have background checks. i support that. [applause] assaultid vote for an weapons ban, the gun package. >> i introduced the assault weapons ban one i was at the state legislature. florio, i happen to be

the mary at the time, we both wore bullet-proof vest. we're all entitled to our opinions. most of my friends belong to the nra. but we differ on certain issues. ondo not differ very much universal background checks. i'm fighting that one. i'm not giving up on that one. >> out of all the gun control ,ills introduced in congress since connecticut, can you name a single thing he could have prevented? >> of the bills we introduce? >> can you name any single bill were introduce?

washe ban on muscle ovens -- the ban on assault weapons was introduced. many of our police are outgunned . there is no need for canons in the street. there are no needs for bazookas in the street. people may say the is a free country. many of my friends do not believe it is a free country. they want to be able to get their weapons, to hunt and display. they want to have the antiques. i do not want to stop them. i will not accept that i do not have the right to know, like we have the right to know who was coming into this country, and to his leaving it, simple point. i think we have a right to know a background check on those who like --

--applicable to the tragedy friend, i am answering your question. that would have helped, that piece of legislation would have helped the weapons away from terrorists and people who are not have the mental capacity who got out of jail. next. flex that was an answer. -- >> that wasn't an answer. [applause] >> i don't live in your district. i want to comment on hr 3018. first, i want to clarify that the assault weapons ban in new jersey does not stop anyone from getting an a ar-15 or an ak-47. >> i wrote the legislation. there are some that are on the list. >> absolutely. >> you are not educating me on it.

>> i'm just clarifying. 3018, the 50% tax on ammo, i think it is interesting to add an excise tax to something that people rely on her personal protection. if you propose doing that for fire extinguishers or first aid kits, you'll be laughed out of the building. >> no one is suggesting that. i'm not left out of the building. that.one is proposing that is accepted to be a useful tool for defense of home property. especially useful when emergency services are at your house you. >> ask your question. >> my question is, how can you justify that when you expect gun owners to be training as much is possible to be proficient? i can't --

>> asked the question. if you already have the answer, why you ask me? >> this is a serious question for me. i do not have a lot of money. i try to become proficient in firearms. i cannot tell you how many times i could take a course or a safety course, but i cannot afford it because you have to provide your own ammunition. >> this legislation does exactly that read -- executive. >> i couldn't find the whole bill. it hasn't been released through the budget offices. this is a serious question. >> mail him a copy of the bill. know if you have considered the implications of making ammunitions or expensive for people who are trying to protect themselves.

you can give as much money to the police as you want. i cannot guarantee them to be at your house when the stuff hits the fan. >> i would rather take the chance of it being out there, and better arm than the people who was a criminal. >> that has nothing to do with 3018. >> if you read 3018, we are talking about training people and educating. the money that is -- >> i want to be will to go to arrange. -- a range. >> i've read the outline of the bill on your website. how can you justify making it more spencer for someone to go to the range and learn? >> what are the exceptions in the bill? >> law enforcement, anyone connected with the government. >> that is correct.

>> i'm not connected with the government. >> we can look at other exceptions. i have a committee also. >> ok. thank you. >> next. >> good evening. i grew up here. and that being able to attend committee college as well. i've been here since i was six years old. being able to recite the pledge of allegiance. -- i beenn able to painful to be an american. unfortunately, in high school i found out that i am undocumented. i do not have legal status here. that is something i came across -- i didn't have much choice in what was happening in the matter. action,bama's deferred i am able to work legally.

>> what is your question? while we discuss immigration reform, will you stop militarizing our >> you haven't been on my website. that is what i have been trying to do. get online. we need to accept particularly those people who served in our armed forces, and we want to send these people back? no, you've got the wrong guy. you can be sure i will be there when it comes time for the immigration vote. you know who i am. you know the legislation i have been on. this cannot be a romantic journey. this is the real thing. if people have real concerns,

and i have real concerns about the visa -- why should we be bringing in other people from other countries when we should be training our own people for these jobs? i've got some real concerns. i am not marching in lockstep to anybody. >> thank you. >> yes sir. >> my name is marcus. >> i remember you. we have actually spoken online, not me in you, but the society has spoken online about the bill you recently introduced. several concerns have come up. i'm going to read them to you. was has already said that poll taxes are illegal because voting is a constitutionally protected right, why is a gun and ammo tax not illegal for the same reason?

second question is, how is taxing my ammo -- i only shoot paper and steel -- >> one at a time? i will let you finish the question. >> second one is -- >> was that the end of the first one? >> the poll tax versus the mo tax. >> this tax already exist. this tax you already pay. law recommending to assist enforcement that we raise that tax on the ammunition and the weapon. >> it already exists, but it doesn't make it right. >> you said that this is a new tax. >> i never said it was a new tax. >> you did say that you are going to raise money on the guns and the ammunition. it is already law. >> it doesn't mean it is right. slavery was a lot. -- was a law.

1776 -- >> are you familiar with the law as it now exists? >> yes, i'm coming here to ask you. >you are the congressman, i'm not. >> i want to increase the tax on those two items, ammunition and guns, and the law already exists. existing law, why do you think it is constitutional to tax something? >> it has already been tested and it is constitutional. >> why? >> i don't have the supreme court decision in front of me, but you will have to read them. i will read them also. then we will discuss them. was, why isd part this going to reduce crime versus just be punitive. criminals do not buy mo from the guns stores -- by ammo from the gun stores i go to could they buy them from a trunk in newark. >> they can buy them from a

trunk anyplace. >> but they are not going to be paying the tax. >> that is correct. >> why should i be punished because he is a criminal? >> that is why we need universal background checks. >> you mean there is going to be a background check on the trunk? >> obviously they are getting away with it. that is the whole point. >> i have personally confiscated homemade shotguns. you can't -- >> my brother, let's not get off your agenda. one item at a time. i'm singing universal background checks is something that needs to be enforced. it is not being enforced because we do not have a lock. >> that is not in your bill. >> no, it's not. we are trained to get money for law enforcement. -- trying to get money for law enforcement. does the government have a right to take weapons away from you? let's say this legislation became law tomorrow. will you have to give up any of your guns? >> no, sir. >> what is your second question?

>> the last question is, theories have been raised that putting a tax for specifically a democratic congressman -- to put a tax on ammo, it is a backdoor way for people to vote against it. >> that is pretty weird. work with me. they are out there fighting for me whenever i run for election. they know where i stand on it. they disagree with me. cannot be, one i issue people. that is what is destroying this people -- this country. we do not have to agree on many things. we do not have to agree on everything. if we are going to say, one issue is the whole banana, you've got the wrong guy. one assure you i'm not the -- a one issue person. you'll have to hear what i have to say on syria. >> good, thank you. next. good evening, everyone.

i'm doing very well, thank you. my name is lisa. very happy to be here. i'm meeting you for the first time. i have a question for you. knowledge that you have a position supporting single- payer. can you explain to everyone what your position is about, please? --we started out looking out at as an option, single-payer to put everybody in medicare. we could not get nearly enough votes to advertise this. don't forget at the time, the democrats controlled the house. that means many democrats were not supportive of it. is when i cameve --th with the public option in the exchange, have a government plan so that it would

be competition with the private plans. we didn't have votes for that either. so. what we could get enough votes for is a mandated plan for business -- because everybody has to be into it, or else it doesn't work, and that is what they did in massachusetts as well -- that is a republican idea, not a democratic idea -- we chose that plan. we wanted to make the competition robust so that when you, if you chose to go on the exchange, you would see all of these different plans, and you were going to choose the one that would be most effective for you and most efficient for you and then you make your decision. that is why i ask you, beg of you to read the articles that we gave you, the stuff we gave you tonight. if you have questions, call our office. >> mr. pas grow come disagree with you on that point. the affordable health care act

-- i cannot read all the pages. >> i helped write the darn thing. wait a minute. he does something a shorter doesn't make it better. >> absolutely. i think you are mistaken. i apologize for that. i must tell you that if everybody can be informed, you can make it better and simpler. >> excuse me. there weren't enough votes. >> i do understand that. i'm well-informed on that. what is happening is the single- payer is a democratic idea. it has been known for many years. when obamaot happen proposed a health care plan, single-payer has been around for 60 years -- my question to you is, as a democrat, what have you been doing all of this time to inform people? listen, please let me finish. >> your question is pretty long.

go ahead. democrat, are you supporting single-payer? what did you been doing to inform everybody in your party, every part of your constituency, to explain what is single-payer? let me tell you what it is. it is taking out private insurance -- >> i'm not going to be lectured to. i do not want to lecture you. i want to know what your question is. >> what did you are slowly been doing-- personally been to inform your party? whysickle pear is better -- inform your party why single-payer is better? >> we were the ones that put the health care bill together in the subcommittee on health. i was on that subcommittee. we put that together. we looked at all the possible options. i told you at the back of

position was. there were not nearly enough votes. we cannot even get it out of committee. we were the majority at that time. that is what i have done. i am on record very clearly. when you question me, i grant --, i will give you time >> i want to thank your support on single-payer. that makes a difference for everybody who supports single pair who believes -- >> wait a minute. i do not accept your answer. we probably agree on a lot of stuff, but i do not accept what you just said. we've got to come to compromises sometimes. i cannot have it all my way. you cannot have it all your way. >> i haven't asked you to compromise. >> what are you asking me? about going tong committees. we are not in the committee. we do not know what happens inside there. >> it is all public record. >> it is a public record.

as a public record, everything informing -- what i am asking you, as a congressman, to explain to your constituents, to make a better effort -- what is the main difference between single-payer -- >> if everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. right now, i want to make the affordable care act workable. i haven't the time to look at putting through legislation for single-payer because i would be wasting my time right now. i do notn't mean support it, but i'm a little smarter than you and cap look. -- than you think i look. >> you are very smart. thank you. >> good evening, congressman. >> isn't this a beautiful country? come on. don't be so grumpy. i love it. go ahead. >> my name is barbara. i'm a member of local 100 unite.

i'm am an executive board member. we were present thousands of workers in new jersey. regarding the aca. we believe that the companies are going to cut the hours of the workers do not have insurance that accompanies it, which will cost them more money out of pocket. at this point in time come in new jersey, it is very expensive to live. if they have to pay for their own insurance, they are not going to be able to live. there is no way that enough money is going to come out of this. also, with the subsidies, the union workers are required to pay the taxes on the subsidies, however, they are not eligible to receive them. >> it depends, their income. -- it depends upon their income. >> we would like you to try to tweak the language so workers in new jersey do not get hurt. >> that is a legitimate request. i've tried to tweak a lot of things. >> thank you so much. yes, ma'am.

my name is lori. i am from fort lee. first, i think i would be remiss not to say that the comparison between slavery and gun access is offensive and should never be made. the degradation of human beings -- one of the constituents in this audience said it. >> i do not think you meant it to be offensive. >> it is offensive. my question is -- i will not do a lecture -- i am a supporter of marriage equality. we do not have that in new jersey. , what can you do to make marriage equality a , quite nationwide frankly, because i think it is a

marriage issue that should be considered on the federal level? ma'am, let me be straight with you from the very beginning. if that vote came up in the house of representatives, i would vote yes. if you asked me to do something in the state of new jersey, under this governor, under the situation between the governor and legislature, you've got another thing coming. i'm only going to deal with things that i can change. i have so much energy. you only have so much energy. deal with the things that you think you can change. do your best. do not give up. do not only have one issue. >> definitely not. that is why i addressed you today grade in any event, if there should be a chance, i hope that you do come out in support of marriage equality. >> ok, thank you. i think this is a great time to introduce the people who will be next. they work every day for us. i never hear complaints about

anybody who goes to our offices in inglewood or lyndhurst or in patterson about them not getting full service. --ant you to give them all let me introduce them all. at the end, we will give them a round of applause. my deputy chief of staff. already mindel is my legislative director. the head of my caseworker constituent service in the back. carmen? where are you? there you are. stand up. nancy everett, where is nancy? nancy, thank you. she takes care of all the veterans, medicare, medicaid. in the last two years, nancy and i have been trying to get people out of their foreclosures. how we got into that, i don't

know. the banks are the banks. you know exactly what i'm talking about. sheila anderson, are you here? thank you. letter, a homeless try to call her yesterday. -- tried to call her yesterday. homeless veteran she helped, you did a fantastic job, sheila. do not forget our veterans. bobby, where are you? are you irish. -- irish? he is our communications person. michelle d'angelo, my scheduler. you are still standing. my field representative. my staff assessment --

assistant. did you bring your fan club? shannon, come on up here. hurry up. let's give shannon a great round of applause. i will tell you why. let me tell you something. shannon is the newest person in our office. she is running englewood and lyndhurst. she just or did a few weeks ago. this is who you have been dealing with if you have caseworker in this county. she will be starting us off. let's give her a nice round of applause. [applause] did i forget anybody? ok, next question. jackie, where are you? is jackie here? ok. i can't hear you, george. make sure it is on.

don't pull it out. thank you for listening to me. this guy knows what he's doing, george. there you go. speak out. thank you. [inaudible] >> what is your question, doc tor? my answer?

all right, i understand the question. convinced that we are going to be soon in the midst of a cultural change, to use your words. profession andle the whole system. it is going to be moving towards results-oriented medicine, instead of fee-for-service. here is the problem. us -- i said us, not you time, of us, 90% of the do not read the bills. our answer? what the heck do i have to be worried about? i am covered.

boy, have we been snickered. we can never have enough money for health care if we continue to go the direction we are going. we need to cut costs. what has been very, very interesting in the 12 states ist are into this already that the premiums in those states have all been tremendously lower than they were the previous years. i have looked for hope in the affordable health care act that we will bring down the cost of health care. it is not just enough to find the money to do this. you've got to cut the costs to do this. that means we've all got to be involved. thank you. next? thank you for the opportunity. i have a question. i want to know your opinion about jobs that are taken

overseas. what should be done to prevent be anand should that amendment to the constitution united states, to prevent that happening, or what should we do to attract -- >> number one, we've got to trade -- change our trade laws. for to trade deals that have begun to change the process could our trade deal with jordan -- process. our trade deal with jordan and our trade deal with peru, dealt with labor issues, human rights issues, currency issues. we do not putts around like we they dochina, because it with manipulating the currency. we allow them to do that. to do something very

important, i think. that is to make sure every trade deal makes it fair for both the workers in their country and in our country. the nafta deal that we made under a deal i support 100%, president clinton, i was wholly against that trade deal. i think nafta caused a lot of jobs to be lost not only in the united states of america but also in mexico and the mexican area. that is the first thing i would do. the second thing i would do is limit the amount of hib visas. i want to train americans to do these jobs. we are bringing these other people in, give them a lower wage, and probably some the back in five or six years. thirdly, i do not like reading -- read in my hospital, and i'm calling india. i love indians, but i do not want to call my -- call their country in order to figure out my x-ray.

these are things we can do to preserve american jobs. i've only got 44 more. next. schapiro. is matt i am president of the new jersey tenets organization. -- tenants organization. i could ask 100 questions. i would just limit myself to two issues. social security, medicare. they concern our members. they rely on them. earlier, you said that you would vote against an increase in the cola. >> no, i didn't. >> you said you would vote against, oppose an increase. >> no, no, that was the cpi. >> an increase in the cola formula? >> i support an increase.

i try to make it a statutory thing. that is my legislation. >> maybe i am saying it wrong. >> ok, you are. that doesn't make you a bad person. >> no, it doesn't. my question is, what ever you said before was very good, but if it is not included in the bigger deal -- >> no. >> what is your next question? >> everybody applauded. that is pretty great. what he meant is he will not vote for anything that includes that as part -- that is a very important thing. >> when i first ran for the congress, i said i would never vote to privatize social security. i have kept my word ever year. [applause] friend, it is obviously not my looks that got me here. i keep my word. what is your second question?

>> i have known that to be true. earlier, you said that medicare was extremely efficient. i agree with you. an expense ratio of 3% whereas private insurance companies -- >> little higher than 3%, but that is the point. >> those are like 30 personally -- 30%. >> more like 14%. >> the aca probably brings it down. you also said you support single-payer health care, but you do not want to work on it. >> i do not have the time. it ain't going to work. leader,estion is, as a isn't it also important sometimes, not just to make things work, the way you do so teach and but also to to say, what we really need,

eventually, in order to solve the crisis in health care that case,got -- in this medicare is great, medicare for all is the only real solution. one way you could do that -- >> i never said that. >> that's what i am saying. one way that you could do that which would take no time at all, no energy at all, sign onto a h.r. 676.r. -- it would provide medicare for everybody. everybody in, nobody out. it would not cost this country one more dime and it is currently spending and would cover those 50 million people who are not covered with good health care. lyricallyis unfeasible. >> that is your position, not mine. >> ok. why don't you sign onto 676?

>> i thought i answered that before. i thought i did. in all honesty, i think i did. didn't i answer that question? i answer the question simply by, if everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. i'm not going to be a one issue congressman. i'm going to fight for what i think is right for the working people who have no voice. i see that. ,ou may say that sounds corny it's empty, but i fight every day. i fight for our veterans. i fight for the firefighters. i fight for the people who have no say and do not have a job. my biggest contribution to that legislation on the affordable care act is, how can we deny a ,oman who has breast cancer coverage from an insurance company? that will never happen in the

united states of america. that is important. >> very important. >> those kinds of things we can change and have changed. >> thank you. let's give him a nice round of applause. i want to go over, before you leave -- i want to go over quick gongs that we need to get -- over. can you bear with me for a little while? please. i want to take a moment to discuss the recovery from sandy. this building that we are in. withstood a tremendous amount of damage -- that damage was about $1.6 million. hold on one second. town was waiting to see what the insurance would cover, like everybody else, whatever their problems were. the insurance company as of this

state has covered $700,000 of that $1.6 million. we have a little ways to go yet. aboutve received $140,000, which we fought for, from fema to help you put this building back together. in little ferry, the operation was whacked out altogether. we had to get trailers we could put the police department in. there is no city hall. we are trying to help in that regard. that is why the secretary came to our part of the world, secretary donovan. i said, if you guys go down to the shore once more, and you leave hoboken and all the towns that got banged around out, you are going to have one hell of a mad guy on your hands.

they came up to northern jersey. we have the press conference and we got those things straightened out. we will apply for every dime to make sure the city hall is better than it was before. we talked very briefly -- that is sandy, we have a long way to go. we got $50 billion. the part of the country that voted against us, we have all voted to help them whenever they were in need. it is a wacky world we live in. if you saw the governor of south carolina, governor haley, nikki haley -- she has had a devastating problem with flooding and water, and her crops were damaged. she said, i need help from the federal government. every one of those congressmen in south carolina that were on

the other side voted no to help new jersey. texas, i went there myself, and the president sent me out there to see how bad it was when all of their homes were -- we flew around in a helicopter, and i was in awe. we hoped, we were the first ones to help. we are probably the most generous. they voted no. withis what we are doing in the congress of the united states right now. it goes beyond democrat and republican. it's just people who do not see that we have an obligation to each other. this is the united states of america. hadlready have one solo -- one civil war. we are not going to have another one. we help one another to the best of our ability. this is not about a perfect world. you're not going to find it. you've got to make the best of

what you've got. try to do it, day in and day out. we know that the task force had 69 recommendations. we are 100% committed to get this thing done. i want to talk a little the briefly about the affordable care act. can we get that back up on the screen? jersey -- new jersey benefit from the affordable health care act? millions of new jerseyans have artie benefited by getting lower drug costs -- already benefited by getting lower drug costs. they saved millions in insurance company refunds because that particular company went less than the 80%, which is now the law. it is lower costs. that is what it saved each person. it is better care. it goes from moving away -- where's the doctor -- he left? we are moving away from fee-for-

service, and we are moving towards results, like they do in the cleveland clinic, like they do with the mayo clinic and more clinics throughout the united states of america where doctors are salaried. you have no idea how much we are going to save in that regard. 50 people who are not necessary in the operation sign onto get paid by the insurance company. you want to know why your insurance combat costs are going up? -- insurance costs are going up? you have to read your bill. don't tell me you don't read your bill. you have to read your bill. if i do say so myself -- yes? >> [inaudible] >> yes, we do. in the affordable care act, we

have incentives in there to train more doctors, to train more doctors, and we've got one million nurses who will be ready by the europe 2022 deal with that problem as well. >> my daughter is in there. it is hard to go ahead and become a physician's assistant or something like that -- it costs you 30,000 -- $30,000. how does a young couple do this? >> when you talk about cutting the budget am a we all want to get rid of the stuff we do not really need. when you talk about cutting the budget, what we need to be very careful about is that word, cutting. we are not cutting investments into our future. when we decide not to fix a ordge or to fix an airport to fix of federal highway, this is an investment not only for now but the future.

are we waiting for another bridge to fall down? when you're trying to balance the budget, it is not an easy task to slash and cut and cut everything away. you do not know what you are cutting half the time. >> i agree with you 100%. is there any funding to help the kids? how do they get it? >> come to my office. we will help you get it. next, this young man. we have time? we've got to go. one more question. that is all right. >> this chart looks great. true, --if this is all >> like i'm not putting it up there on a whim. >> i just wanted to say something. if this is all true, why would there be 1000 exemptions, people not wanting to go wanted this? >> because you've got to read what i gave you about the myths of health care.

if you don't have it, make sure to get it. i hear you. believe,taff, i requested not to be on this. is that correct? >> no. >> what about the other congressmen and senators? i think it was reported -- correct me if i'm wrong -- that they opted to be out. >> i'm usually getting hit from the other side. no, that is not true. >> you mean the staff of congressman and senators did not ask to be on this? >> to be in the program? go ahead. >> the staff are in obamacare, period. there is no exemption. that is a myth. >> that is a myth? >> they will go on the exchange like you go on to the exchange. >> are you going to be on that? >> i do not have federal

coverage. i have my own private plan, which i am fighting with all the time. feel? know what i that congressmen and senators, if they have a lot 51% ofis, if there is the people that are on this program, i feel the congressmen and senators should also be on this program so they can truly -- >> i understand. >> how could you represent us if you are not in the program? >> all congressional employees right now are covered under federal health benefits program, but under the affordable care act, all congressional staff members and members of congress are going to be buying their coverage for the exchange. >> thank you, sir. you are going to promise me that you are going to read the myths thing? >> [inaudible]

social health care benefits for the members of the senate and house, representatives, and thousands on capitol hill. that is reuters. what they say -- >> what are you reading? >> the reuters website. this is the official news website. >> that is today's story? >> i just looked it up on the internet. all i had to do was google "congressional members, obamacare exemption." >> sir, there is no exemption. we have to buy our health care -- let me explain to you. we always receive -- if you get health insurance from your employer, you get a subsidy for your health insurance. you pay part of it, and your employer pays part of it. as of last year, we paid part of it, and the federal government paid part of our health insurance. that will was made so we can continue receiving our subsidy

so we would not pay 100% of our costs. we get the same subsidy from our employer that anybody else who got health insurance from their employer would get. that is it. there is no other exemption. >> let me say this could what is your name -- this. what is your name? >> john. >> i believed you. let me say what i want to say. excuse me, tom. in every oneis -- of your questions tonight -- you have a right to ask anything of me -- i have never run from a fight in my life, and i have never run from a question, so you have every right for an answer, but what you keep on answering -- asking questions to try to catch me? excuse me. -- excuse me,ou sir. you do not prove me wrong one inch. in fact, i do not even have the plan i told you. you do not listen to me. >> it was important.

reuters,ported by which is a repeatable news organization. >> did you just hear what he said? do you understand what he said? ok. >> the report is true. [inaudible] he said was that congressional staffers are not different from regular people who want to go to exchanges. >> they are regular people. >> no, sir. they are subsidized. >> by the way, anybody who buys insurance on the market can apply for subsidized asian -- subsidies. i said that a half-hour ago. >> just because they can apply, doesn't mean they will receive it. >> that's true. >> subsidizing all congressional -- >> that is what happens now. that is what happens with your employer. you pay part of it and the employer pays part of it. >> i do not want to lose coverage from my employer

because of obamacare. >> this just continues the plan. the employee still has to play -- pay. >> isn't the deal with obamacare that everybody pays in buys insurance through the exchange? tono, not if you do not have do that. if you are on medicare, you certainly are not going to change her position. if you are covered by your workplace, you're certainly not going to change your insurance. if you are a federal worker, you're certainly not going to change your insurance rate you will have the same rights and abilities as everybody else. what are you talking about? anybody else have any other questions? >> [inaudible] >> i saw that. that is a great question. why.'t know

that is a private company. i'm going to find out. >> probably because of economic reasons. >> you know the answer? >> that's what was in the paper. >> why did you ask me? you do not believe everything. >> i do not trust the congress. >> i do not trust anybody. >> i do not trust the president. [applause] know, nasa can be recording this. >> i voted no. >> i don't care. >> you don't care but you bring it up? >> you are only one guy. >> i'm your friend. >> you are not your friend -- you are not my friend. i will get my own opportunity. -- we will end on that note. can i end on this note? sir, what is your name? >> you do not need my name. i do not trust the irs. i do not trust anybody. you do not need my name.

of guys. bunch the irs is such a nice bunch of people. let me say to you this -- my name is bill, in case you cared about it -- let me tell you something. i don't mind your distrust. that is your prerogative. you have reason to it sometimes. not all the time. not all the time. , you will be you able to help reconcile some of if problems this country has you come off your shtick that you know all the answers. when you take the position that you are not going to read anything else that doesn't fit into your agenda, i've got to beg to differ with you. you know all the answers. let's come to an agreement. >> what do you want to agree on? >> you want to agree on something? i, if there's

anything we disagree on, i'm willing to sit and have a cup of coffee with you and we will discuss it. if you do not think that is important enough, and i do, then maybe i'm the fool and you know more than i. >> i do not call you a full grid i did not say i know everything. we get preached to by the president of the united states -- >> i'm not preaching to you. >> thank you very much. i appreciate you coming. >> nice to talk to. god bless you. wait a minute. we are going to wrap it up. let me say this. no, let me finish it, and i will answer the question. i promise i will answer you -- can you hold on? what is your name? >> [inaudible] >> can you hold on? you've got to hurry? you've got a show at 9:00? [applause] -- [laughter]

, in 2009, when i was a congressman in the eighth district, a lot of debates were going on about health care. there were some doozy town hall meetings. dooziest.of the people. they bust some people in that were nowhere near my district. -- bussed some people in that were nowhere near my district. everybody is yelling at each other from the beginning of the thing. i had a couple of doctors, a couple of people, and we were up there on the stage. we made our presentation. was over,e the thing i was accused of being a communist, socialist, and one of the people accused me of being a lackey for the right, for the conservatives. how do you do this?

no wonder people get schizophrenic. at the end of the meeting, i me, this is believe nothing like what i experienced then -- this is easy. i said, look, we are all walking out of this, 1500 people, montclair police were there, the campus police, great human beings, take it easy. some people came here to be arrested. i said this, we are all going out, and were all neighbors. -- we're all neighbors. what are we going to do? we are all neighbors. i disagree with these two guys on gun violence. so what? i respect what they think. they had the guts and the courage to come. they knew this was not going to be packed with nra members.

so i respect that. if they do not know why i respect that, then they haven't followed my record. -- i say to them is this there is a plethora of issues. we are going to agree on some, and we are going to disagree. but we are not when to back each other into the corner and say, you are no good. you are anti-american. or what they did to our president, to check out his birth certificate. no other president in the united states had to go through what he had to go through. i didn't -- i do not agree with all of his policies, but that is besides the point. this is america. we areall in it, or than not in it, and then we are not american anymore. we have to have respect for everybody's opinion. question washe very critical about the single- payer -- i cannot bite off more --n i can chew and swallow

anybody on any issue. whether you talk about abortion, whether you are talking about marriage equity, if that is all you care about, the world is behind you, baby, and you are missing a whole lot. tonight, when you go home, i want you to think about those poor kids and those mothers and fathers who none of us even know . i know a lot of syrians. i know they go back into their motherland a lot. think about what is going on over there. what a great country this is! >> [inaudible] >> i don't think they did. that is your opinion. you are entitled to it. >> [inaudible] >> you do not like hillary. >> i loved hillary up until then. >> i will tell her that you love her up until then. [applause] hey, you promised me you are

going to read this stuff we give you tonight. if you have questions, call up the office. you may be surprised. you may like this. you may wind up liking it. even if you do not agree with us. do you think every person that and likes andares accepts every vote that i have made? you've got to be nuts if you do. you got a bit crazy. i got a lot of votes from the other side. how do get a lot of votes from them if this is what you are saying? because you know it is important? business, and that guy was howt, he doesn't trust -- many politicians are giving him a straight answer in his life? i'm trying to be straight with

you. you may not like what i say, but you cannot hang me for being straight. that is all that matters. have open ears. god bless you. we are going to see you again. you know what? you were a great, great, great audience. colette, stand on your feet. [applause] want to go to your office, because i do not believe this. i read it when it first came in. >> you have a special appointment with me. you can bring it with you. >> i will. second of all, congressman, i -- all you when you say those other congressmen, they opted out. >> many of them have the same private plan. not mine. >> some do not want to be in obamacare. >> excuse me. if you like what you have, you

keep it. i said that an hour ago, and isple said, ok -- there nothing in the law that >> says you must change. > i work with verizon. we cannot have what we have before. -- had before. >> insurance companies have the right to change their plans. >> you cannot keep your plan if you have it. >> you will have to go get another plan. >> then that isn't true, congressman. that is a half truth. the president said, if you like your plan, you can keep it. sure, that is fine. i would love to. but i cannot. they changed my drug plan. i worked 29 years for verizon. >> we are saving money on the part of the bill, or the act, that talks about drugs. we changed that whole thing. you are telling me you did not get a check? you are paying higher health care costs now? >> for my drugs, yes. >> then i would like to take a

look at your plan. >> i will bring it to you. >> it is not obama that did it. >> it is because we belong to a union, and the union doesn't have the same plan, the company did not give them the same plan, and one of the reasons is because obamacare is coming in. ok? and in defend obamacare, many ways it is good. in many ways it is not good. >> and the ways it is not good, we will try to tweak it. >> i doubt you'll be able to. >> we tweaked social security and we tweaked medicare. we will tweak the affordable care act. >> if you do that, i will always vote for you? >> we want you to be healthy. death i do not want any panels. >> i'm over 65 years of age. andnot speaking for myself -- myself.

you will get a preventive look perhaps someday when you are over 65. that is good, isn't it? >> i am over 65. >> that's not my business. [laughter] you are going to get a preventive checkup. >> i get one now. >> you do not pay for it? >> no. >> good. that is your plan. congress has to take the plan that you put in that you do not read before you voted for it. congress has to take that plan. when they take that plan, then i will believe you. >> do i have to say this one more time? i wrote part of that legislation. i had to read it. do you think it was fun? >> if it was a republican plan, why did you put it in their? if republicans made the plan, why did you do it? >> you take good ideas from regardless where they come. you put them with your good ideas. that is america. that is why we are the greatest country. god bless you and good night.

[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> in a few moments, a town hall

meeting focusing on defunding the new health care law. then british house of commons debate on a proposal supporting military action against syria, a plan that was eventually defeated. on the next "washington journal ," we will look at u.s. foreign policy, particularly what options the u.s. has in syria. our guest is peter wehner. in 2012, he was a senior advisor to the romney presidential campaign. the national alliance on mental discusswill be here to the effect of sequestration on mental health services and sit -- and society's perception of the mentally ill. we will also discuss the cost of college in federal student aid with jack buckley from the national center for educational statistics and the president of college measures. live onton journal" is c-span everyday at 7:00 a.m.

eastern. one of the most fun times i ever had -- it was 2006, and it looked like democrats were really going to take back over the house, and it was looking pretty bad for republicans, and vice president cheney's office called and wanted to know if rotenberg and i could come over and have breakfast. we went over to the vice president's residence and had breakfast with him. i had met him before. i did not know. first of all, it was unbelievable how much he knew about -- he has been to so many of these districts over the years as one of the republican leaders of the house and this and that, but basically he was sort of asking us how bad -- us, how bad is this? we were saying, it is pretty bad. that is kind of fun when you get to talk to the various sides and you kind of get a glimpse of the inside players. a with more than 30 years as

political analyst, charlie cook has uncovered the trends while tracking every congressional race since 1984. see the rest of his "q&a" interview sunday night at 8:00 on c-span. >> the group heritage action of america has been holding a series of town meetings across the country. focusing on defunding the new health care law. the ninth and final meeting was this evening in wilmington, delaware. his is a little less than an hour and a half. -- this is a little less than an hour and a half. hello, delaware valley. [cheering] [applause] great to be with you all this evening. my name is andrew. i am part of this team at heritage action. the opportunity to be here on the first -- in the first state is very exciting for us. thank you for the warm welcome.

[applause] as many of you know, it is a nine city tour that heritage action has been going on, talking about defunding obamacare across the nation. [applause] we decided on delaware and the surrounding area, a pretty important area to come to when you're talking about obamacare because this may come as a surprise to some of you when i say this -- we agree with vice president biden that this bill is a big deal. it must be defunded. [applause] last night, we were in pittsburgh. we were talking to them. over, theyrogram was were talking about how great the pirates are doing. they have a winning season this year. which is exciting for those of you, the few of you that are pirates fans. [laughter]

they told us to give you a hard time about how they are doing better than the phillies. [boos] i told them we would have to be really careful about that because the eagles have done so much better in the preseason than the steelers, and they do not like to hear that. we are so pleased to be with you all tonight. we've got an incredible program. it is so incredible. c-span is here. they will be broadcasting this live at 7:00. [applause] i'm going to get everyone on their feet. this is a rambunctious crowd. we introduce the political director of our heritage action, let's give him a warm welcome, russ spoke -- folk. [applause] >> good evening. welcome to the heritage action defund the townhall. as andrew said, this is our night sky. these are the kind of crowds we have been getting. we are enthusiastic that you are

here. to support defunding obamacare. to come out on a thursday night to learn about how important it is, how we can do you are going to hear a lot about congressional accountability. important about defunding obamacare, and how you accountabilitye to your member of congress. we believe that every member of congress needs accountability, whether they are the best or worst member of congress. what does that look like? [applause] we believe congressional accountability looks like this. those that know, grow, and go. they know the issues, inside and out, often better than their member of congress. they grow their network of relationships, their skill set, so they can get the conservative

message out, and then they go and lead in their communities. a get the message out and are influential, and we are looking for a vast network of these people across the country so we can provide an infrastructure of accountability. we believe they have been doing it all along, and we want to stay in the system. we have established federal programs to invite more people to be trained and to do this kind of important work. there is oneia, woman who is involved in her local tea party, or local republican club. when she first started, she was relatively inactive, but now, she is taking meetings with her congressman. she goes in there armed with the facts, and she is able to get the message out about obamacare. she is giving us her pledge. [applause]

>> i pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the united states of america, and to the republic of which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [applause] going to have our next guest come up and give us our prayer. for those of you who do not know in, he was with the country 1957. [applause] oppression and came to find a better life. he came to texas and started a life for himself. andtarted a small business grew it and became involved in a ministry, and now he is a traveling preacher. in the great state of texas.

[applause] and i am judging by the clapping that you think he is doing a pretty good job. [applause] he is going to come up later in the program to do a call to action. for right now, please welcome him to give us our prayer. >> since you are standing, please remain standing for our prayer. oh, father, we praise you. we thank you for being americans, father. they q4 living in this wonderful country. father, we thank you for the history of this country, the only country in the world that

was created by people seeking the freedom to worship you. we thank you for our heritage. we thank you for those founding on their knees, seeking revelation from above as they created the greatest document that ever existed in government. to thank you for the principles of the declaration and the constitution that have guided us for over 230 years. know those principles are under attack today, and we pray, lord god, that you listen to us, with the perseverance to restore those principles to our country. we bless you for it all. in the name of jesus, amen. [applause] >> thank you, ross al. rafael.

now is a man who got his start at the heritage foundation and then went on to run one of our top policy centers at the heritage foundation and went to business school. we like to think of him as having a brilliant mind with the guts of a street. please welcome him. [applause] >> thank you all. thank you for being here. thank you. my wife says something very different about my gut, and i like what you said better. [laughter] i start off with an apology. we have been doing this all around the country, and somewhere around, we lost our teleprompter, so i apologize. my mother told me if i just tell the truth, i will not get mixed

up. that is what we will do tonight. thank you all for being here. it makes a big difference in our country. i know there is a lot of things we could be doing tonight. we would love to be out with our families or friends. some with our jobs. but we all know if we are at home, screaming at the tv by ourselves, our voice would not matter, so we come together with 500 people unified together with one voice, demanding change from washington, demanding washington step up and have the courage to defund obamacare. [applause] and it makes a difference that we are all here speaking with one voice, but i can tell you what smart people in washington are saying right now. i can tell you. they are saying that all of us here with our commitment to principle, with our spending thursday night together, it is all of us here that is the

reason washington does not work. we are the reason nothing gets done in washington. which is just an astounding idea. in the last 12 years, washington, d.c., has had the feingold campaign finance reform, sarbanes-oxley, dodd frank, had no child left behind. we had medicare part d. we had obamacare in 2010. period in our country's life, the legislation of this magnitude would be historic. we are told that this does not work. washington is not broken. washington is a finely tuned machine that is aimed at expanding government, taking away our freedom, and picking winners and losers in the economy. [applause] but here is the dirty secret. all of us in this room together, when we stick together, when we

make sure that our voice is heard, when we hold congress accountable, we can stop it. they cannot pass this legislation unless we allow them, and if we go to their town halls, if we go to the ballot box, if we demand change from washington, we will get it. [applause] and so, we have a problem in washington that there are a lot of people that seem to be part of the no, we can't caucus. they say, no, we cannot have a low, flat, fair tax. they say, no, we can't get rid of our department of education. and right now, they are saying no, we cannot defund obamacare. that is not true. we all know, yes, we can do all of those things. [applause] and let me tell you how we can do it. the first and most important,

immediate thing is that every member of congress who tells you he is against obamacare, every member of congress who says we are in favor of repealing it, that i will do everything i can to stop obamacare, needs to sign the letter in the house or the letter in the senate, and let me tell you what those are. the senator from utah. he would not vote for any continuing resolution, i will not vote for any continuing government built in september unless you defund obamacare. [applause] and a representative from north carolina has a similar letter, and right now, there are 14 names in the senate, and only 14 names in the senate who have stood up to say they will not are 80 do that, and they people in the house who have said that, so one of the things we have to do is go out and hold our members accountable, ask them the question, are you on board with the letters, and if

not, why not? and the second thing that has to happen, the house of representatives comes back on september 10, the first day they are back, and pass the government funding resolution, say we are going to fund the entire government. we are not going to shut down or slow down, but we will not fund obamacare. [applause] the elected representatives have to go on offense. they have to go all around the country, because we have done our job. we have funded the government, but we are taking a timeout for obamacare. there is a lot of information that has come out over the last couple of months, to the employer mandate, to the way premiums have gone up, to dropping people off their coverage, to just yesterday, a delay in signing up people with the exchanges. so we are going to have a one- year defunding of obamacare, and

if the president wants to shut down the government because he is so interested, then that is on him and not on those people who want a timeout. [applause] but you are going to hear a lot of excuses from your elected representatives when you say reasonsd one of the heritage action exists, and one of the reasons we are located here, and as you are leaving, please stop by our table and sign up. there is someone full time in this area, who will give you the to the questions you will hear from the people in congress. do this,ould love to but, you know, it is just not possible. there is so much going on here, mandatory spending, and you will not touch mandatory spending on acr. cr.n a

calleds passed something a hide amendment. it talks about money for abortion. this is every year since 1976. furthermore, every single spending bill that passes in washington, d.c., there is changes in mandatory programs spending. so we have all of this information for you at heritage action, so when you go to a town hall or ask your representative a question, and he says, i would love to do it, but i cannot, you will have the information to push back. we acknowledge you can, in fact, defund the mandatory spending on the appropriation bill. they can say, well, we only have part of the government. we only have the house of representatives. well, that is fine. that is true. but they have the power. if the house of representatives does not want to fund obamacare, it does not have to. [applause]

people say, yes, that is true, we could do that if we want it. the constitution gives us the power. but a will say, we will never win the debate. we will never convince the american people, and the president has the mandate. condescending speeches that the president of the united states gives. when when we have fought have the american people not listened to our ideas and said, those ideas make sense? on the stimulus, we were told there was no way we could win the argument, but we did. cap and trade, there was no way we could win the argument, but we did. obamacare, they jammed it down our throat and used procedures to get it passed, but the american people will continue to be against this law. [applause]

but here is the final thing you will hear. that we couldou do this. i agree we have the power to do it. maybe we need to go out there and win the argument if we forcibly made it. but let's not do it right now. wait 60 more days, then the playing field will be better set. everything will be lined up, and then it will be fine. do they think we are stupid? how many times have we heard this? we heard it in 2011 and 2012. we were told in 2012 if we just put our heads down, we are going to ride to victory in 2012, and that did not work out very well. but, you know what? we do not have the time to wait. on october 1, sign up for these exchanges start. on january 1, things start happening. we do not have time to waste.

the time to fight is now, and that is why we are all here now to defund obamacare. [applause] but i can't say that from a peer on stage, but i am just one person. i need to hear it from all of you, so with all due respect to the president of the united states, i ask you, can we keep the iressa from enforcing obamacare? yes, we can. can all of us get a waiver for yes, we can. >> to tell our representatives you told us you were going to do everything, you are going to defund obamacare. >> yes, we can. ofcan we do defunding obamacare? >> yes, we can. >> ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to introduce the president of the heritage foundation, senator jim demint.

applause]d >> thank you, thank you. thank you. [applause] thanks for coming. i am so proud of mike and his team. on the insideing that they are making progress, and the way i know that is a lot of people are complaining about what they are doing. say, if you are not taking fire, you are not over the target, and we have got democrats and the media and everybody firing at heritage action, and that means some good things are happening, so, mike, thank you for you and your team. [applause]

i am especially proud of mike. if you heard him when he first came out, and he said thank you all for coming. now, he is from new york. maybe that is out of respect for someone who came from south carolina, but i appreciate that. he is making a lot of progress in trying to relate to everyday americans, but i hope you are as inspired as i am that we can really make a difference, and that is what we want to talk about here tonight. [applause] i know a lot of you had to wait a long time in line to get here. you are all packed in here. a lot of you had to stand up along the walls. but there is a purpose. willnt to simulate what it be like in a doctor's office. [laughter] [applause]

to national, government-run health care. this is what it will be like. i cannot tell you how good it is to be out of the senate and with you tonight. [applause] many good things have happened to me since i left the senate. the first thing was i did not have to go to the inauguration. and then it got even better. i did not have to go to the state of the union address. but the best part of it is every day, i get to go to work with about 270 people who love this country, and even more important, they understand the principles that make this country great. we are thetand why most powerful, successful, prosperous, most compassionate

nation that has ever been on the face of the earth. happen by accident, and it was not geography. it was not even the people that were here. it was a set of ideas that were unique to the whole world. at is why we are gathered here as conservatives tonight, is we believe in this country, and we love this country. we want to protect those things that make this country so wonderful. it is great to start a meeting like this with thanks. [applause] the first amendment gives us the right to petition the government for redress with grievances, and we are here tonight because we have a lot of grievances, but we have one in particular we want to talk about, but before we do that, i want to just go back to the becausepening us up, sometimes we seem angry as conservatives, but we need to begin every conversation, every

redress of grievances with what came from that prayer, just a gratefulness that we are americans, that we live in this country, a wonderful country, recognition that we are so blessed to be here, and that the blessings of liberty and the things in that prayer, every time he starts that, and this is the ninth or 10th we have done in the last couple of weeks, it just reminds me of how grateful i am. and everything we are talking about should be in the context of how grateful we are to god and to the millions of americans who came before us. [applause] because we have got our rights and privileges and blessings not only from god but from the americans who sacrificed, work, and many gave their lives, so we can have what we have here today, and we know ronald reagan

reminded us that freedom is a fragile thing. it can become extinct in each generation, that we as americans have to stand up and fight for what we have been given, and i know a lot of you have been in uniform, have served the country. responseyou have been -- thank you for that. [applause] this goes just beyond the military in uniform, because we you areamericans, if responsible for yourself, if you raise a family, if you volunteer in your church, your community, if you work to make this country better, it is part of handing to the next generation what is so good about this nation. so many have forgotten that, that this is not a top-down country. becauseot become great we were centrally managed and

centrally planned with somebody in a distant place making our decisions for us. the reason we are so unique and so prosperous and so successful, and the reason there is so much opportunity in america is we are a ground-up country, beginning with the families and the things talked about that make this country great. freedom is really when millions of people can make their own decisions about what they want to do and what they value, and when you have millions of people doing that, you create this dynamic freedom you have when people are innovating. they are entrepreneurs. they are starting businesses and working in their communities and volunteering to make things better. that is what america is all about, but when you have someone, and you have politics and politicians, they want to take those freedoms away and replace it with a centrally planned, centrally managed system which has destroyed so many nations.

gratefulness turns to frustration and sometimes anger when people are portraying those principles that make life that are. we are not here tonight just for ourselves, the people who vote for conservative ideas. as conservatives, we are not going to rest until every american can get their hands on the land of opportunity and climb as high as they can dream. [applause] and even though some in washington, around the country do not understand those principles of personal responsibility, limited government, those key ideas that we talk about, those are the ideas that create a better life for everyone and more opportunity, and even though some folks to not understand it, i am not going to rest until they do, that they understand why america is so special and so blessed, and we can not sit idle

while people misinform and give all of these false promises for people to give more and more of their freedoms to the government, and even when those promises consistently do not come true. we know that what we are here tonight for is truth. it is not a theoretical, political argument anymore. we know that president obama, president obama's policies, where they take our country. not have to look any more at greece or portugal. we can look close by at detroit. folks, that is a picture of where liberal, progressive ideas go. was america's premier city. highest per capita income in the country. it was the pride of our country in the auto business, with unions growing, higher taxes, more regulation, as you saw

these liberal, progressive ideas that were supposed to help the poor and grow the middle class, what have we been left with in detroit? 40%.loyment about has it helps children get a better education? percent of children in the eighth grade read at the grade level. the prosperity that they talk about when a third of the buildings are empty? you have got 400 liquor stores, and until a few weeks ago, not one chain supermarket in what was america's premier city. state of illinois and california and other states that are following those policies are not close behind into some form of bankruptcy. ideas are being showcased all over the country. and you create more choices competition in education, people thrive, and children get a better education.

[applause] liberals who are now for choice in education because they have seen what happened to the scholarship program. we have got stories and real who got areal people scholarship to get out to another school, and they are in college today with a chance to succeed and take advantage of the opportunities of this country. [applause] that is not a political idea. it is not a conservative idea. it is an american idea to allow terrance choices for a school where their children can succeed. foro allow parents choices a school where their children can succeed. not rich children. they already have the choice. this is for folks who have been told that the ideas would hurt ideaswhen, in fact, those

were being opposed because of special interests, not because of the interests of the children. you see states that recognize that less government and lower taxes will create a better economy and more jobs. you see texas with low income tax and florida with no income tax, and people are moving to these states, and it is not just about helping business. it is the families and getting the jobs and having a better life that we want to talk about all over the country. our ideas work, and we can show they work. when they passed tort reform to limit lawsuits, what happens? doctors, the best doctors move there. that is where they want to practice. the cost of health care goes down. [applause] right. we are it is not enough to be right. we need to make sure that every

american understands that what we are for is not to take some political agenda but to make their life better, to give their children a better education, to give them better health care. that brings us -- [applause] that brings us to what we call obamacare. principles i just talked about, i cannot think of anything that is more un- american than national, government-run health care. [applause] those who believe in those principles of socialism and collectivism, we have seen over as centuries that they see the holy grail taking control of the health care system, such a personal service, such a part of the economy. if they can't control that, they lives.trol our

that is something some have wanted for years, and all of the proposals, and i have made a lot of them myself, which was designed to make the best health care system better, to make this available to the americans, we know these are commonsense ideas that can make health care and health insurance available to more and more americans. you do not have to have a 2000 page bill and 20,000 pages of legislation. it is common sense that if you give businesses a tax break for buying health insurance that you should do that for individuals as well. it is a simple thing to do. [applause] make health insurance less expensive and more available to individuals. but if you let people who live in pennsylvania or delaware buy health insurance anywhere in the country instead of just here -- [applause]

you have dozens and dozens of insurance companies instead of just a few competing for your business, and then the choices you want, whether it is a high deductible or low deductible or keeping your children on your policy until they are 45, whatever you want. [laughter] become available as companies have to compete for your business, not just your employer's business. we know that small businesses have to pay a whole lot more for insurance than large companies, so we have had proposals, which i have supported in the house and the senate, which says, here is an idea. why do we not let a lot of small companies come together and pool their employees to buy less expensive health insurance? [applause] and that does not have to be just for businesses. churches can do it. rotary clubs. not let people pool their

employees? it does not cost the government anything. it does not hurt anybody. democrats and congress block to that. do you know why they blocked that? because they want national government-run health care. they do not want the system to run better. we had ideas to work with the states to create insurance plans for those who have pre-existing conditions, high risk conditions, and the democrats do not support that. it is not about getting people insured. it is about controlling our lives from washington. that is what this is all about. [applause] who tell you there are not ways to fix the system -- that isservatives not true. we have ideas that have worked, and when they have been tried to can getree, we know we people the health insurance they need, but we also know the

promises that have been made by this government run health care law have not been kept so far. they are not telling us the truth. it was sold under false pretenses. the american people were lied to, and you have every right to demand from your officials that we stop this ill right now. [applause] let's review some of the so you know, if you expect people to get good insurance from this, that promises not going to come true either. what did they tell you? first of all, it is going to lower the cost of health insurance. the average cost of health insurance premiums would go down 2500 dollars. instead, they have gone up about $2100, ok? they have told americans if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it. the folks at ups found that is not true.

the folks at universal studios when we were in florida found out that was not true, and a lot of businesses are finding that out. not only are they not going to keep the insurance they want, they are not going to keep the job they want. they will be moved to part-time. creating jobs. that was one of the promises. now, the second-largest employer in america is a temporary firm. even the unions are saying it could de-the 40 hour work week. folks, the promises are not coming true. that those who do not have health care are going to have it under this plan is not coming true. ontoare pushing people medicaid style plans that do not pay doctors enough. what is going to happen is you are going to have a plan, but you are not going to have a doctor that is going to see you. and the final thing for me,

after being in washington and seeing the federal government tried to do a lot of things, egg things, small things, i have yet to see one thing the federal government can manage well. [applause] and if the military was not somewhat outside the political process, we would be in trouble, too, but, folks, even though programs like medicare and social security and the people who paid into them, these are promises we have to keep. all of the money you have put into washington all of your life has been spent, spent before you got there, and the program now is in the red. more is going out than is coming in. people have been paying into medicare their whole life, and there is no money that has been saved. that is creating tens of trillions of dollars of liability on our children. these other programs they say

are working. i have seen them try to start small programs that seems like they might could do them, because they were going to help sell american cars a couple years ago. remember cash for clunkers? it was a brilliant idea. they cut $1 billion that was supposed to run a program for six months. two weeks later, it was broke. why i call obamacare a cash for clunkers health program. [applause] what the product is, no matter what the intentions, even if they wanted to, they cannot manage an american health care system. folks, we do not want government run health care. a team of us from heritage were in london a month or so ago talking about their national health plan. we were there,en

it was about how many people were dying in their hospitals. why can't they change it? it is because now, the health care system in britain is the largest employer in the country. they are all unionized, even the doctors. they control not only the health care system but the whole system. they cannot change it. it is locked in, and you have to wait forever for health care. what we are used to getting in a few days. we do not want that in america, and we do not have to have it. they are bad ideas, and we can stop it. for atalk about obamacare minute and then we will get two questions. it is more important than it is urgent. if there ever been anything worth fighting for in the political arena, it is this. [applause] know as americans, government run health care will

change everything about america. our culture, how we think about each other, not only our health care system but our political system. economy, and it is important that we have high quality health care. because october 1 is when the sign-up begins, and then january 1, tens of billions of dollars of subsidies go out the door. there are those in washington who say the best strategy is to go forward, and americans will see what a mess it is, and that will help the republicans win the next election. i am not willing to unleash that on america in hopes that we can benefit later, because -- [applause] thank you. once you move people onto government health care, the private market is going to dry up, and it is going to be almost

impossible to go back. this is the time to stop it. it is urgent, and it is important. this is a battle we can get and. it is interesting what they are saying in washington about this, a lot of talking heads and commentators and politicians. they are saying, heritage, you are crazy. you cannot win this. it is impossible. i have been told a number of times that things are impossible in washington. a lot of those are called senators now. a couple of years ago, this place is a mess, we are not going to change it until we change the people who are here. i did not go to the party. i went to the people in the country. i went to wrestlemania, and it was not popular to endorse pat toomey against a sitting , theyr, and i was saying were telling me that they would

never vote for him. i heard the same thing about marco rubio or rand paul or out in utah. [applause] we have not won the battle, but when they say it is impossible, it is time to get to work, because we can change things. that weid that there is can never get rid of the earmarks in washington. it would never happen. republicans and democrats like to take home the bacon. for is why you go and stay 30 years, because senior members take home the most bacon. i had a conference in 2008 to ban your marks, and i got five votes and a lot of dirty looks and lectures. bridges tobout nowhere. we talked about the waist and the fraud and the abuse.

75% of americans thought we should get rid of these things even though sometimes it benefited their state or congressional district, and what happened is the politics followed. you had the people in 2010 pledging that if they got there, if elected, they would walk in the door, and they would ban earmarks, and that is what happened. 2010 when marco rubio and pat toomey and rand paul got there. gone.ks have been they passed by one vote. [applause] so my point is this. it is not impossible. it is winnable, but the last point is it is really up to you, and you have already taken the first major step to make this happen, because every member and people all over the country know you are here, and that there are a lot of you, and the politics,

if one person calls you, there are probably 1000 people who feel the same way, so if you took the time to show up, we know there are tens of thousands of people that feel the same way that you do. we are americans. we do not have government health care in america. we are more innovative than that. we can make the system better and better until everyone has a policy they can afford. [applause] so let's celebrate our country here tonight, the principles that made us great, and let's leave here and do something about it. our whole point of going around andcountry, this is a tour, i am a guest traveling around with them. on the foundation side, i want people to understand how bad this policy is and to educate and communicate to people that they can do something about it. they take the ball from there and take the message to

congress. there are networks around the country. together, you are the people who can stop this bill. mike, come on up. [applause] >> this question is from henry in chester springs, pennsylvania. why is it only a handful of principle congressmen represent the people? when will representatives represent? easy in really washington, d.c., to play the game. it is really easy to get there and say, you know what? if i just stick one more tax that is into one bill longer than the kings james bible, nobody will notice. morejust write one put ation, if i miscellaneous tariff, giving an advantage to this type and not paid off. i can get

i can raise millions of dollars for my campaign, and the more i do it, the higher i rise in congress, and the higher i rise in congress, the more zeros will be on my paycheck. it is easy. it is comfortable. there are a lot of people who come to washington to drain the swamp and end up in the hot tub. it,there is a way to stop and that is holding the members of congress accountable, which is why it is important for you to be here. i was told a couple of weeks ago by a senior leader in the political world. he said, you guys at heritage action, you guys have unrealistic expectations. you think congress can do this. they are only 12%. he looked at me like i told him for the first time that the world is round. the approval is only 12%.

it is because you do not hire and fire people. holding up those champions, those people who do the right thing. 2000 people on their feet, and ted cruz's name was mentioned. [applause] he has taken the leap of faith, saying i did not come to washington to join the party. i came to washington to join the fight. me add to that, because when you hear a lot from washington, the reason people fall off when they are there is there is a lot of risk involved if you take a stand, because most of the echo chamber in washington is telling you to spend more because a lot of folks are there lobbying for more things. to stand up for something is a risk. i am reminding people all over the country that, yes, it is

risky, if we try to stop the funding of this government health care plan. we could lose. all this work we have done around the country could be wasted, but that is kind of what america is about. sign thesky to declaration of independence. it was risky to be at the beaches on normandy. i tell people a lot, since when do americans not stand up and fight for freedom because they are afraid they might lose? [applause] >> this question is from ellie jones. care is defunded, what is the best way to make sure americans can have this health care at an affordable price? >> we have talked about these ideas. them bettercan get

insurance than a medicaid-style plan, which research shows does not necessarily help people to be healthier than having no insurance at all. people where they need plans and can see the doctor. about the individual deductibility, the small business health plans, shopping across state lines, lawsuits. there is a series of things we can do, that americans can understand if we can implement at very low cost to taxpayers that we know would make the system better, and if we keep working on it, we can keep finding little ways to make sure no one goes without insurance. i would like to think that i can help by insurance for my grandchildren when they are five years old, policies they can keep throughout their life. there is no reason they have to wait to get a job to get insurance, and when they lose a job, they have to wait to get new insurance.

but we do not have to replace our system of government health care to fix that. [applause] tawnys question is from potter. would it not be stronger to lump this into one big issue? >> there are two major points between now and the end of the year. our country is in bad enough shape that we need to take care of both of them. everyone that says that we should wait, what will be different if we blow past that point and then fight on the deadline? there are a lot of people that say we should not mess with the debt limit. why do we have a debt limit? there is no economic reason. there are a lot of countries that do not have a debt limit. the debt limit is a fire alarm. we choose to have a debt limit so when a fire breaks out, the alarm goes off, and we have a

conversation about whether or not to do something about it, and it is 70 or 80 times that the fire alarm has gone off, and each and every time, we have taken the battery out. [laughter] window.ave opened a there is a fire going on in our house, and both parties have a responsibility. trillions in debt. [applause] and so the time to fight on obama care is now. the date is october 1. not in october. the time to fight is now. >> this question is from susie. since the current administration is dividing americans, how can the conservatives bring a message of unity and healing to to talk aboutlove

that, because i know there are messages that unite people. we have seen a lot of that. while the tea party has been vilified a lot, i went to a lot of tea party meetings, and there were americans there who did not like either political party much. there were liberals, a lot of people, but they were focused on the basic economic issues. they want to stop the spending. they knew in their gut if we keep going this way, we were going to bankrupt our country, and part of that was stopping obama care, stopping bailouts. it was a strong message of fiscal responsibility, and it united the whole country. at is what gave americans the -- gave the republicans the majority in 2010. it was to stop the madness, and that is what we need to do.

it is what we are going to do in the heritage foundation next year. [applause] all we need to provide americans in the conservative movement, a united american agenda that is simple and clear and that pulls everyone together. votethose who never conservative, if you sit around the table and talk to them, most americans agree with why you are here tonight. [applause] >> this next question is about divided government. there is anplan be? assumption built into this question that talks about where we are. here is what the assumption is. care so of the debate much about enforcing this that if we get into a showdown, if we

get into a temporary showdown situation, there is no chance that the president and democrats will blink. it means that much to them. and on the other side, there are the conservatives, and if we get into a showdown, we do not care about it. we have gone against obamacare 40 times as long as it does not mean anything. into a showdown with the president, can you imagine if the current consulting class in washington, d.c., on the side of the republican party, in 1993 defeated,ry care was the first thing you would be told is do not touch health care. left believes this stuff. the democratic party actually believes the progressive agenda. the only way to win is for our side to meet it as much.

like you are on a football team. the coach of a football team, and you have got one team, and these guys are trying to win, and we say, if we agreed to talk, maybe they will place the ball on the 42 yard line. there is one party who believes the role of the government is to do defend that, talking about are aclaration, and there bunch of grievances, and it is the government's role to solve that. the other is to take the fight to the american people, trust them to be there to catch you, and when you do, we win all of the time. look at the situations senator dement talked about earlier.

>> this question is from paul in delaware. outdo you get the message to young people about obama care and in general? there is a six-year-old towards the back there. can you stand up? [applause] into battle with him any day of the week. we are not here because we care about an election. we are here because we are trying to save the country for that young man, and that is what we are here for. [applause] optimistic that the younger generation, i started off with an apology. to --eration, we voted one for obama, so i apologize.

the generation that saves the country. my brother is 24 years old. he has never in his life bought a cd, but when i was growing up, cd'ould spend $15 to get 15 s, and we only wanted two of them. goes to relative who itunes to pay for songs. goes to kayak and looks at every single flight. he looks at how much money he can save if there is a layover. he looks at wi-fi and the price, and he makes a decision. the notion that this generation is going to accept obamacare, that they are going to have a panel of people to decide what the cost effective treatment or be mandated to buy certain

coverage in their insurance package, they are absolutely not in touch with the younger generation. [applause] >> this is our last question, but if we were to encourage complacent friends to do one thing to be informed citizens, what would that be? >> take some action. will talk for a second and let the senator come up, since i have halt the last couple of questions. the most important thing is to be involved, and by showing up today, every single stop on this tour we have been on, there has been major media attention of the capacity crowds. the have turned away, unfortunately, hundreds of people who could not get in because of the great demand to come out here and be heard. and applause]

and then stay involved. i want all of you to go to our website and look at our scorecard. we make it as transparent as possible. every vote, what are thinking is, why this was an important vote. why it was one way or another. and go ask your members of congress. why were you not on the side of heritage action? why did you not take the conservative view? a lot of members get a lot of heat. we actually talk. but they also need to hear thank you when they do the right thing. on your way out. you can be as involved as you want to be. we will be right there. if you want to spend time e- mailing and calling, we will help you with that, and we will go all of the way up the ladder, going to town halls, going and

organizing in your neighborhood. us helpolved and let you be as involved and active citizen so we can get out on track. >> thank you. [applause] >> i want to add rafael cruz, but i want to leave you one comment with somebody who has been on the inside, in the house and senate, so you know how much power you have. trying to there and shake things up, and a lot of folks were trying to take my legs out from under me, the only thing that kept me going was knowing there were millions of --ple who had my back, [applause] went in the country,

people would say, thanks for fighting. we are praying for you. was can i do? and i knew i down the right team -- on the right team when i got out of washington. whether they are in your state for not, i can tell you a lot right now. does not even have to travel. every time we mention his name, people clapped. [applause] power to change our country is in your hands, and that is why we are here tonight, and i want you to hear from rafael cruz. have been all could in dallas, and he will tell you the story. when he was introducing ted cruz, talking about their story on the time he was in prison in was theree time he

with his son in the united states senate, what a wonderful country we live in, but it is not a country that belongs to government. it belongs to we, the people. [applause] it for senator jim demint. [cheers and applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] senator dement, let me tell you that you were the inspiration for my son. you paves the way for him. and he has it fulfilled. thank you. while i stand here before all of you, i know from personal experience what it is to feel

the heavy weight of a centralized,taking away my freem of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, confiscating private property, shutting down businesses, attacking everyone that had anything, small business or big business. putting preachers in prison. i will tell you that in the middle of all of that they impose a socialized medicine system in cuba. they had a premier medical system. the university was renowned worldwide for its quality of medical construction.